Tile Unlimited, Inc. v. Blanke Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the consumer nexus test was not satisfied where false representations about a product were directed to plaintiff and other industry participants, not consumers
• holding that the plaintiff did not allege defendants’ false representations were directed toward the market generally when plaintiff alleged only that the false representations were directed toward it and other tile installers
• holding tile installer that purchased underlayment product and used it to install ceramic tile in homes and businesses was not consumer because it resold product to customers
• finding that plaintiff was not a consumer where it used defendant’s product—a substance that helped tile lay flat to a surface--as an inseparable component of its final product sold to consumers
• reviewing appellate case law and concluding that the common defense doctrine does not apply when the plaintiff’s claims against the non-diverse and diverse defendants are based, at least in part, on distinct theories of recovery
• a non-consumer may bring a claim under ICFA if defendants “have engaged in conduct that is either directed toward the market or otherwise implicates consumer protection concerns”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).