Skip to main content
· 11/15/1993

May Department Stores Co. v. State Ex Rel. Woodard

Citations

  • 863 P.2d 967
  • 17 Brief Times Rptr. 1782
  • 1993 Colo. LEXIS 901
  • 1993 WL 467725

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting that the Consumer Act “does not require proof of an actual injury or loss before a civil penalty can be awarded” (emphasis added)
  • reviewing other courts’ interpretations of the civil penalties provisions in various state consumer protection statutes
  • reviewing other courts' interpretations of the civil penalties provisions in various state consumer protection statutes
  • noting disclosures are ineffective if the consumer may be confused by the disclosure or if the advertising is false
  • Colorado Attorney General sought injunction and civil penalties to punish the retailer for deceptive comparative pricing policies
  • \The legislature's use of the disjunctive 'or demarcates different categories.\ (alterations and some internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Erickson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.