Legal Opinion

Thiedemann v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided May 18, 2005PublishedCited by 187 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJustice LaVECCHIA

The New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act (CFA), N.J.S.A. 56:8-1 to -20, authorizes a private cause of action when a plaintiff has suffered an “ascertainable loss of moneys or property, real or personal” as a result of a practice in violation of the CFA. N.J.S. A. 56:8-19. This appeal focuses on the enigmatic requirement of an “ascertainable loss” and, specifically, on what a plaintiff must demonstrate in order to survive a motion for summary judgment when challenged on that issue. We hold that when a plaintiff fails to produce evidence from which a finder of fact could find or infer that a plaintiff…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Brill v. Guardian Life Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1995
  2. Cox v. Sears Roebuck & Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1994
  3. Daaleman v. Elizabethtown Gas CompanySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1978
  4. Meshinsky v. Nichols Yacht Sales, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1988
  5. Furst v. Einstein Moomjy, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2004

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by187 opinions

  1. Marcus v. BMW of North America, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2012
  2. Bosland v. Warnock Dodge, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2009
  3. Pomerantz Paper Corp. v. New Community Corp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2011
  4. Anthony D'agostino v. Ricardo Maldonado (068940)Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2013
  5. Ana Alpizar-Fallas v. Frank FaveroCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018

182 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API