Canfield v. VSH Restaurant 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, in accordance with the Act’s liberal-application directive, nonresident consumers who purchased allegedly misrepresented items in Illinois had standing to sue under the Act and were members of the class
• holding that, in accordance with the Act's liberal-application directive, nonresident consumers who purchased allegedly misrepresented items in Illinois had standing to sue under the Act and were members of the class
• noting that “[c]ourts in this district are split as to whether the [Consumer Fraud Act] may apply to consumers who are not citizens of Illinois” and holding that the Act could apply where “the transactions giving rise to the action took place in Illinois”
• noting that “[c]ourts in this district are split as to whether the [Consumer Fraud Act] may apply to consumers who are not citizens of Illinois” and holding that the Act could apply where “the transactions giving rise to the action took place in Illinois”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).