Arcand v. Brother International Corp.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that plaintiffs cannot leave the court to speculate about whether what a plaintiff received was worth less than what a defendant promised
• stating that a plaintiff must “allege facts pertinent to their own personal experience with the product”
• noting that a court may consider essential documents to a plaintiff’s claim referenced in its complaint
• stating that a court may consider documents referenced in complaint that are essential to plaintiff’s claim
• explaining that under the NJCFA, “allegations of an affirmative act, ie. a misrepresentation, do not require a showing of intent or even actual deceit or fraud”
• stating that to properly plead ascertainable loss, plaintiff must “specifically allege that what he did receive [] was of lesser value than what was promised” and to do so, plaintiff must typically “allege facts pertinent to their own personal experience with the product”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).