In a recent decision, plaintiff was a wholesaler and purchased 5,000 printer ink jet cartridges that defendant represented to be made by a particular manufacturer and "100% original and in perfect condition."
After the purchase, plaintiff discovered the goods were counterfeit and sued to collect damages under several theories, including the CFA.
The trial court granted judgment to plaintiff and granted CFA relief.
Defendant sought appellate review.
YOU BE THE JUDGE: Doesn't every person damaged by fraudulent sales techniques get CFA protection?
The
Appellate Division affirmed the trial court judgment, except as to the CFA claims.
The court concluded that not every sale in the marketplace was covered by the CFA and not every buyer was intended to have the protections of the statute. Therefore, the CFA protections were not automatic, but to be determined on a case-by-case basis.
The court noted that the CFA does not define a "consumer" or a "consumer transaction." However, the statute was intended to afford protection to individual purchasers of economic goods and services.
In the case under review, plaintiff purchased a common consumer product, but not for its own use. Plaintiff was not an unknowing buyer, victimized by deceptive practices. Rather, plaintiff was a sophisticated buyer, intending to resell the products at a significant business profit. Plaintiff knew there were potential risks of imitation products.
Therefore, plaintiff was not the type of consumer the CFA protected. Plaintiff was entitled to have relief for defendant's conduct, but not the CFA remedies.
The decision points out that a courtroom can bring justice and may be the only way to protect your rights. We know courtrooms; we have harnessed the power of the law in courtrooms to bring justice for our clients for decades. Please contact us to discuss how we can help you in a new lawsuit or provide a "second opinion" about your pending
lawsuit. There is no obligation for the initial consultation.
