New Jersey Supreme Court Holds “Illusory Discounts” Do Not Support a Claim of Ascertainable Loss Under the Consumer Fraud Act
Gibbons Law Alert
by Caroline E. Oks
1w ago
In a 4-3 opinion, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that the mere purchase of a product falsely represented as “discounted” does not, without more, satisfy the “ascertainable loss” element under the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act (NJCFA). In Robey v. SPARC Group LLC, the plaintiffs – a proposed class of shoppers at the retail clothing store Aéropostale – alleged that the store advertised clothing as being discounted when, in fact, the items had never been offered or sold at the higher prices off of which the “discount” was taken. The plaintiffs contend that this practice of so-called “illusory ..read more
Visit website
Federal Trade Commission Issues Final Rule Banning Non-Compete Agreements, Prompting Immediate Litigation Blocking Enforcement. What Does It Mean For Your Business?
Gibbons Law Alert
by Christine A. Amalfe, Christopher Walsh and Zachary L. Miller
1w ago
On April 23, 2024, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a final rule banning all future and most existing non-compete clauses, with few narrow exceptions for senior executives.  The rule, however, was immediately met with legal challenges, casting doubt on its future. The FTC has taken the position that entering into a non-compete agreement is an “unfair method of competition” within the meaning of the Federal Trade Commission Act, therefore rendering non-competes unlawful as a general matter. The FTC reasons that a non-compete ban was necessary to address conduct harming fair compet ..read more
Visit website
Edwards Lifesciences Corp. v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd.: Should “Intent” Be Reconsidered in 271(e)(1)?
Gibbons Law Alert
by Warren K. MacRae
3w ago
Edwards Lifesciences Corp. v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., Appeal No. 22-1877 (Fed. Cir. March 25, 2024) Considerations of 271(e)(1), a 2-1 decision on appeal from a grant of summary judgement of non-infringement, addressed the question of whether 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1)’s safe harbor applies to the importation of two medical devices (transcatheter heart valve systems) into the U.S. for purposes of exhibiting the devices at a prominent medical conference that reported on the latest developments in cardiovascular medicine. The devices imported by the defendant had been approved in India and rec ..read more
Visit website
NYSDEC Proposes Amendments to Cleanup Program Regulations
Gibbons Law Alert
by David J. Freeman and Matthew J. Sinkman
1M ago
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) has proposed amendments to regulations governing the Brownfield Cleanup Program (BCP), the state Superfund program, and other remedial programs. The proposals would affect many important aspects of NYSDEC’s cleanup programs. NYSDEC’s proposed amendments include the following: Limiting the costs of a “cover system or site cover” that are eligible for tax credits Requiring BCP “volunteers” to perform additional tasks, including sampling, off site Requiring applicants to conduct searches for potentially responsible parties ..read more
Visit website
Sweeping Affordable Housing Reform Signed Into Law in New Jersey
Gibbons Law Alert
by Cameron W. MacLeod and Kenneth D. McPherson III
1M ago
On March 20, 2024, Governor Phil Murphy signed what could be the most significant and impactful affordable housing reform legislation in New Jersey since the original enactment of the Fair Housing Act (FHA) in 1985 in A4/S50 (the “Law”). After the New Jersey Supreme Court declared the Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) “moribund” in 2015, municipalities and developers, as well as interested advocacy groups, have been engaged in constitutional compliance litigation in an attempt to determine how best to create realistic opportunities for the construction of affordable housing. These various c ..read more
Visit website
Refusal to Wear a Face Mask May Leave You Constitutionally Unprotected
Gibbons Law Alert
by Thomas J. Cafferty, Nomi I. Lowy and Lauren James-Weir
2M ago
Is there a constitutional free speech right to refuse to wear a face mask in public indoor spaces during a recognized public health emergency? The Third Circuit Court of Appeals recently determined there is not, as part of a precedential decision in the consolidated cases of Falcone v. Dickstein, et al. and Murray-Nolan v. Rubin, et al. The Third Circuit addressed the First Amendment issue in the Murray-Nolan case. Specifically, the issue the court confronted was whether, during the COVID-19 pandemic, plaintiff Gwyneth Murray-Nolan, an “advocate for parental choice in masking children at schoo ..read more
Visit website
Governor Murphy Proposes FY 2025 Budget Centered on Opportunity, Affordability, and Shared Responsibility in New Jersey
Gibbons Law Alert
by Courtney A. Johnson
2M ago
Yesterday afternoon, Governor Murphy presented his State FY 2025 Budget to a joint session of the Legislature in Trenton, New Jersey. The proposed budget totals $55.9 billion, keeping total spending growth below 1 percent from the FY 2024 adjusted appropriations ($55.43 billion). It includes a $6 billion surplus. The proposal does not include any new taxes but does include a new 2.5 percent corporate transit fee that will apply to many of the large businesses operating in New Jersey and other smaller revenue raisers (discussed below). The Governor’s budget address was centered around themes o ..read more
Visit website
NJ Appellate Division Holds That Residency of Party Making First Contact in Long-Term Business Relationship Is Not “Jurisdictionally Dispositive”
Gibbons Law Alert
by Christopher Walsh
2M ago
Personal jurisdiction over an out-of-state defendant cannot be based on the unilateral acts of an in-state plaintiff. Instead, a New Jersey court may assert jurisdiction over a defendant only if that defendant “reached out” to New Jersey in some meaningful way. Consequently, when an out-of-state defendant is sued by an in-state plaintiff alleging a breach of contract, the court will often look to see which party initiated the contractual relationship when deciding whether it has jurisdiction over the defendant. In a recent published opinion, however, the New Jersey Appellate Division clarifie ..read more
Visit website
Safety First: Counsel Should Take Affirmative Steps to Ensure ESI Is Being Preserved
Gibbons Law Alert
by Kevin H. Gilmore
2M ago
In the advent of the 2015 amendment to Rule 37(e), courts have made clear that counsel’s obligation to ensure the preservation of ESI extends beyond the mere issuance of a litigation hold. Instead, to avoid possible sanctions, counsel must take affirmative steps to ensure the client’s compliance with the litigation hold to prevent the destruction of relevant ESI. In multidistrict litigation over a hazardous spill, In re Gold King Mine Release, defendant Harrison Western Construction Corporation (“Harrison”) was sanctioned for its failure to preserve and produce relevant documents related ..read more
Visit website
Unraveling Environmental Legal Complexities: Lessons from the Clarios Case and RIP Waivers
Gibbons Law Alert
by Jesse G. Richheimer
2M ago
A recent February 5, 2024, decision by the New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division delivered a significant blow to Clarios, LLC (Clarios), a car battery manufacturer facing environmental scrutiny at its New Brunswick plant. This recent decision has echoed through the environmental legal landscape, leaving companies contemplating the use of Remediation in Progress Waivers (RIP waivers) with critical questions and a renewed sense of caution. The case, far from offering definitive answers, instead highlights the intricate interplay between property rights, environmental stewardship ..read more
Visit website

Follow Gibbons Law Alert on FeedSpot

Continue with Google
Continue with Apple
OR