Pennington v. Singleton

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that treble-damage provision of the Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act did not impose an excessive fíne
• holding that ―[m]isrepresentations, so long as they are of a material fact and not merely ‗puffing‘ or opinion, are . . . actionable‖ under the DTPA
• holding representations that used boat and motor were in “excellent condition,” “perfect condition,” and “just like new” were actionable misrepresentations about characteristics and benefits
• holding that Texas consumer protection statute applies to strictly private transactions
• noting that culpability is an important consideration of section 17.50 as amended in 1979
• noting that culpability is an important consideration of section 17.50 as amended in 1979

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).