State Ex Rel. Division of Consumer Protection v. GAF Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that when Act was amended in 1985, it was to require intent to deceive before deceptive trade practice can be found
• “[I]t is axiomatic that a statute should be given a reasonable and sensible construction and that the legislature did not intend an absurd or unreasonable result.” (citations omitted)
• “Section 13-11-4 of the [UCSPA] was amended in 1985 to require ‘intent to deceive’ on the part of a supplier before a deceptive trade practice can be found.”
• “An affirmation of fact, a promise, or a description of the goods must be judged objectively against the meaning that a reasonable person would have taken from the statement.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).