Categories
· Lawsuits
· Labels/Lights
· Advertising/Promos
· Op-Ed
USA, by State
· Massachusetts
Lawsuits
· Aspinall
|
Jump to full article: Washington Legal Foundation, 2005-01-14
Author: Victor E. Schwartz and Leah Lorber
Intro: The Supreme Court of Judicial Appeals of Massachusetts recently stretched the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act (MCPA) to new and unchartered boundaries of extreme liability. Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, Sec. 9(1). The Court eviscerated the tort law fundamentals of a basis of liability, proof of causation and damages in order to allow a deceptive advertising lawsuit to proceed as a class action against tobacco companies.
Sometimes, extreme rulings such as this are considered "tobacco law" and are not applied to other defendants. The Court's decision-making in this case, though, could apply to other industries, especially if they are the "unpopular" ones of the day. . . .
Conclusion.
Lawmakers in Massachusetts should consider clarifying the MCPA and show that the slim majority of the Supreme Court of Massachusetts misconstrued the will of the Legislature. Courts in other states should disavow and reject the decision in construing their own consumer protection acts. Placing unchartered and unsound liability on any industry and creating incentives for frivolous, expensive litigation is fundamentally unsound public policy.
Jump to full article » |