Search for: "T-UP v. Consumer Protection"
Results 101 - 120
of 4,708
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Jul 2021, 12:07 pm
Case citation: Russo v. [read post]
18 Jun 2012, 6:51 am
Consumer Protection Procedures Act and transferred under MDL procedures. [read post]
1 May 2011, 1:58 pm
" Scalia was joined in AT&T Mobility v. [read post]
8 Sep 2021, 7:22 am
” Lorentzen v. [read post]
25 Jul 2016, 9:56 am
O’Kroley didn’t offer a consumer study supporting that conclusion. [read post]
25 Jul 2014, 10:03 am
Yelp and TripAdvisor review about possible mold in a bed-and-breakfast didn’t qualify for anti-SLAPP protection. [read post]
29 Jun 2015, 9:28 am
Real consumers don’t distinguish TMs from products. [read post]
8 Dec 2020, 4:10 am
Supreme Court is gearing up to hear arguments Tuesday on the litigation-fueling question of what qualifies as an autodialer under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, in a fight that’s poised to pit semantics against the public’s growing disdain for robocalls. [read post]
23 May 2022, 1:04 pm
But that ain't me. [read post]
29 May 2024, 9:01 pm
But in Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) v. [read post]
15 Feb 2008, 11:36 am
Millett v. [read post]
3 Feb 2011, 2:23 pm
Consumer reviews normally don't fit within that model of anti-SLAPP laws. [read post]
22 Feb 2013, 7:07 am
Yen: consumers learn rapidly about store brand v. name brand. [read post]
19 May 2016, 7:43 am
You have 2 choices: go ahead and hope that in the event of litigation you’ll end up in the Fed. [read post]
19 Feb 2020, 3:44 am
Greg Stohr reports at Bloomberg that “[t]he Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s independence, designed by a Democratic-controlled Congress to insulate the agency from political pressure, now risks being its downfall,” as the court gets ready to hear argument in a constitutional challenge to the structure of the bureau, Seila Law v. [read post]
14 Jun 2013, 5:14 am
Hart v. [read post]
19 Apr 2007, 5:13 pm
This panel wasn't really about the advertised topic (which is a little bit amusing, given the consumer protection focus) because, I think, practicing lawyers are not as concerned about statements by real consumers as about related issues, particularly promotional statements that don't disclose the marketer's involvement.Mary Engle, Associate Director of Advertising Practices, FTC: For the most part, the FTC isn't concerned… [read post]
2 Apr 2019, 8:22 am
Since consumers apparently can’t bring claims, it’s up to regulators to do it if it is to be done at all.http://tushnet.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default? [read post]
23 Feb 2012, 5:23 am
In Seafort v. [read post]
11 Aug 2008, 3:09 pm
It's been a few days since Geoffrey Hobbs QC, sitting as a Deputy High Court Judge, handed down his decision in Whirlpool v Kenwood. [read post]
