Zerpol Corp. v. DMP Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming that, under Pennsylvania law, plaintiff must “plead and prove pecuniary loss” with specificity
• explaining that defamation and commercial disparagement are two distinct torts under Pennsylvania law
• listing as fourth element of trade libel claim that “the publisher either knows that the statement is false or acts in reckless disregard of its truth or falsity”
• dismissing corporate plaintiff's claim because private cause of action under the CPL is limited to purchasers or lessors of goods used primarily for personal, family, or household purposes
• Court held as a matter of law that allegedly defamatory advertisements could not reasonably be interpreted as concerning plaintiff corporation or its products.
• “[A] private cause of action under the [UTPCPL] is available only to purchasers or lessors of goods . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).