City of New York v. Smokes-Spirits.Com, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the UCL requires reliance, causation, and injury
• explaining that “[a]n injury is indirect or derivative when the loss arises solely as a result of injuries sustained by another party” and that under § 349 “derivative actions are barred”
• noting prior holding that class of persons accorded standing under this section is not necessarily limited to consumers
• stating that a prima facie claim under §349 requires a plaintiff to “demonstrate that (1) the defendant’s deceptive acts were directed at consumers, (2) the acts are misleading in a material way, and (3) the plaintiff has been injured as a result”
• stating that a prima facie claim under GBL § 349 requires a plaintiff to “demonstrate that (1) the defendant's deceptive acts were directed at consumers, (2) the acts are misleading in a material way, and (3) the plaintiff has been injured as a result”
• dismissing Section 349 claim brought by city because lost tax revenue caused by defendants’ illegal sale of cigarettes was derivative to injuries suffered by “misled consumers who purchased defendants’ cigarettes”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).