Proctor v. Kincead

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that because the plaintiffs stated a viable breach of implied warranty claim, their MMWA claim could proceed
• “Having failed to state a viable state law claim for breach of express warranty, Plaintiffs’ derivative MMWA claim must also be dismissed.”
• permitting plaintiffs’ MMWA claim to proceed where plaintiffs had stated a viable state law breach of warranty claim
• permitting plaintiffs’ MMWA claim to proceed where plaintiffs had stated a viable state law breach of warranty claim
• agreeing with the many cases discussed here in holding that plaintiffs failed to state a claim for substantive unconscionability despite pleading defendants knew of the defect at the time of sale and manipulated its warranty
• “False promises, misrepresentations, and concealment or omission of material facts all constitute deceptive practices under [the NJCFA].”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).