Roche v. Fireside Chrysler-Plymouth, Mazda, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming a trial judge’s award of $1,155 in compensatory damages on a conversion claim, as well as $750 compensatory damages for violation of the Consumer Fraud Act
• awarding aggravation and inconvenience damages under Illinois Consumer Fraud Act, where dealership mislead plaintiff into believing that her trade-in vehicle provided ample down payment for new vehicle and that financing would be arranged if necessary
• when car dealer failed to sell consumer “the new Laser based on the terms of the original agreement or to return her used - 12 - car or the equity in it, a direct violation of the Consumer Fraud Act occurred and resulted in damage to plaintiff”
• when car dealer failed to sell consumer “the new Laser based on the terms of the original agreement or to return her used car or the equity in it, a direct violation of the Consumer Fraud Act occurred and resulted in damage to plaintiff”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).