Notes of Decisions
Borowiec v. GATEWAY 2000, INC., 808 N.E.2d 957 (Ill. 2004).
· cites it 8× “" 15 U.S.C. § 2302 (a) (1994). To that end, the Magnuson-Moss Act establishes standards governing the content of consumer product warranties and service contracts.”
Razor v. Hyundai Motor Am., 854 N.E.2d 607 (Ill. 2006).
· cites it 4× “" 15 U.S.C. § 2302 (b)(1)(A) (1994). Pursuant to this authority, as Hyundai notes, the FTC has enacted a regulation that provides: " A written warranty must be `part of the basis of the bargain.”
Tietsworth v. Sears, 720 F. Supp. 2d 1123 (N.D. Cal. 2010).
· cites it 5× “” 15 U.S.C. § 2302 (a)(1)-(13); 15 U.S.C. § 2302 (a)(6).”
Patriot Mfg., Inc. v. Jackson, 929 So. 2d 997 (Ala. 2005).
· cites it 8× “This section of the Magnuson-Moss Act consequently requires that a warrantor who provides a warranty "shall, to the extent required by the rules of the [Federal Trade] Commission, fully and conspicuously disclose in simple and readily understood language the terms and conditions…”
In re Am. Homestar of Lancaster, Inc., 50 S.W.3d 480 (Tex. 2001).
· cites it 3× “15 U.S.C. § 2302 (a). Under the Magnuson-Moss Act, warrantors may establish “informal dispute settlement mechanisms” to further the congressional goal of encouraging consumers and warrantors to settle their disputes.”
Cunningham v. Fleetwood Homes of Georgia, Inc., 253 F.3d 611 (11th Cir. 2001).
· cites it 5× “” 15 U.S.C. § 2302 (a). Fleetwood submits that enforcing seller-consumer arbitration agreements that make warrantors third-party beneficiaries does not conflict with these purposes.”
Samuel-Bassett v. Kia Motors Am., Inc., 34 A.3d 1 (Pa. 2011).
· cites it 2× “, 15 U.S.C. §§ 2302 , 2304, 2311(c). Failure to comply with the MMWA's requirements or prohibitions constitutes an unfair method of competition, in violation of 15 U.”
In re Rust-Oleum Restore Mktg., Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig., 155 F. Supp. 3d 772 (N.D. Ill. 2016).
· cites it 2× “” 15 U.S.C. § 2302 (a). The MMWA further states requirements for remedies under written warranty and exclusion or limitation of consequential damages which include that “such warrantor may not exclude or limit consequential damages for breach of written or implied warranty on…”
Mydlach v. DaimlerChrysler Corp., 875 N.E.2d 1047 (Ill. 2007).
· cites it 3× “See 15 U.S.C. §2302 (b)(2) (1994) (prohibiting the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) from requiring “that a consumer product or any of its components be warranted”).”
In re Apple & AT & TM Antitrust Litig., 596 F. Supp. 2d 1288 (N.D. Cal. 2008).
· cites it 4× “” 15 U.S.C. § 2302 (c). The Complaint alleges in relevant part that: Apple “[told] customers that Apple will void and refuse to honor the iPhone warranty of any customer who has downloaded competing applications.”
Sorce v. Naperville Jeep Eagle, Inc., 722 N.E.2d 227 (Ill. App. Ct. 2d Dist. 1999).
· cites it 3× “” 15 U.S.C. § 2302 (a) (1994). In analyzing Magnuson-Moss issues, it must be kept in mind that in the first instance the UCC governs sales of goods, including accompanying warranties.”
Thomas E. Walton Le'ellen Walton v. Rose Mobile Homes LLC, 298 F.3d 470 (5th Cir. 2002).
· cites it 2× “” 15 U.S.C. § 2302 (a). In addition to establishing standards governing the content of warranties, the MMWA creates a statutory cause of action for consumers “damaged by the failure of a supplier, warrantor, or service contractor to comply with any obligation [imposed by the…”
15 U.S.C. § 2302(a): 2 cases
15 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(1)(A): 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.