Fenwick v. Kay American Jeep, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that intent is not required when defendant affirmatively omits information required to be disclosed by regulation
• stating “the defendant need not have intended to misrepresent or make a deceptive or untrue statement”
• advertisement for used automobile violates NJ UDAP since it failed to include car’s odometer reading as required by state regulation, even though such omission was inadvertent
• “The capacity to mislead is the prime ingredient of deception or an unconscionable commercial practice.”
• statute expressly eliminates the requirement to prove actual deception
• 6 Justices + 1 judge temporarily assigned

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).