Jones v. Stamps

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that E-ZPass \overcharges\ that arose out of the E-ZPass contract itself were \properly understood\ as a consensual transaction
• holding that plaintiffs met the reliance prong of the particularity pleading standard by making payments based on the misrepresentation
• dismissing VCPA count when the plaintiffs failed to allege they relied upon the defendants' misrepresentation to their detriment
• fine accumulated from $4.95 to $3,413.75, but plaintiffs did not receive notice that the fine existed or was increasing by the day
• “The ‘injury in fact’ suffered by Plaintiffs under the FDCPA is . . . being subjected to 5 the allegedly ‘unfair and abusive practices’ of the Collection Defendants.” (quoting amended 6 complaint)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).