<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title><![CDATA[Consumer Law Advisor RSS]]></title>
<link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Media/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/RSS-Feeds/Consumer-Law-Advisor-RSS]]></link>
<description><![CDATA[The latest news about law enforcement, Ohio legal issues, consumers, victims, nonprofits and more from the Ohio Attorney General's Office.]]></description>
<language><![CDATA[en-US]]></language>
<item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/August-2011/Class-Action-Complaints]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Class Action Complaints]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<p>
	<em>Frazier v. Matrix Acquisitions LLC</em>, Summit Cty. Case No. 2011-06-2991, FDCPA violations, class counsel James Burke</p>
<p>
	<em>Marazzi v. The Dial Corp</em>., ND Ohio Case No. 11-CV-407, product misrepresentation, class counsel Frank Piscitelli</p>
]]></description>
     <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2011 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/August-2011/Class-Action-Complaints]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/August-2011/Class-Action-Fairness-Act-Notices]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Class Action Fairness Act Notices]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<p>
	MC-K Sales, Inc. v. Discover Financial Services, Inc., improper fees, Northern Dist. Illinois, Case No. 10-2964, final hearing September 13, 2011, unknown number of Ohio class members, class counsel Rafey Balabanian</p>
<p>
	Richardson v. Allied Interstate, FDCPA, Dist. New Jersey, Case No. 09-2265, final hearing August 31, 2011, 1 Ohio class member, class counsel Andrew Wolf</p>
]]></description>
     <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2011 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/August-2011/Class-Action-Fairness-Act-Notices]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/August-2011/Consumer-Legislation]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Consumer Legislation]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<p>
	<strong>House Bill 275- Right to Cure </strong>(sponsored by Rep. Lynn Slaby and Ron Young): To amend section 1345.09 and to enact section 1345.092 of the Revised Code to allow suppliers and consumers to enter into a Right to Cure agreement.&nbsp; The amended law would give a business 30 days after a consumer filed a lawsuit to make a settlement offer to the consumer, including up to $1,500 toward attorney&#39;s fees.</p>
]]></description>
     <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2011 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/August-2011/Consumer-Legislation]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/August-2011/Fake-check-scams-target-attorneys]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Fake check scams target attorneys]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<p>For years, organizations have warned individual consumers to watch  for counterfeit check scams. Now, these scams also are targeting  attorneys.</p>
<p>The Attorney General&rsquo;s Office has received reports  from Ohio attorneys who say they are contacted by &ldquo;clients&rdquo; who attempt  to pay them with counterfeit checks and ask them to send back some of  the money.</p>]]></description>
     <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2011 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/August-2011/Fake-check-scams-target-attorneys]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/August-2011/New-Cases-in-Online-Public-Inspection-File]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[New Cases in Online Public Inspection File]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<p>
	<strong>EXEMPT TRANSACTIONS</strong></p>
<p>
	<em>Restivo v. Continental Airlines, Inc</em>. (Cuyahoga Cty.), 2011-Ohio-219, <a _fcksavedurl="http://www.opif.ag.state.oh.us/secured/casedetail.aspx?issueID=3635&amp;pif=10002950" href="http://www.opif.ag.state.oh.us/secured/casedetail.aspx?issueID=3635&amp;pif=10002950" target="_blank">PIF 2950</a></p>
<p>
	Plaintiffs purchased a gift card from Continental Airlines which had a one year expiration date.&nbsp; When they unsuccessfully attempted to use the gift card after the expiration date, they filed suit, alleging violations of the CSPA and Ohio&#39;s Gift Card Statute.&nbsp; The Court of Appeals upheld the trial court&#39;s dismissal of the complaint, finding that application of the CSPA and the Gift Card Statute to an airline was preempted by the Airline Deregulation Act.</p>
]]></description>
     <pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2011 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/August-2011/New-Cases-in-Online-Public-Inspection-File]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/December-2011/Class-Action-Complaints]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Class Action Complaints]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[Carthen v. Bayer Healthcare, ND Ohio Case No. 11-2172, product misrepresentations, class counsel John Climaco]]></description>
     <pubDate>Thu, 29 Dec 2011 12:52:45 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/December-2011/Class-Action-Complaints]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/December-2011/Class-Action-Fairness-Act-Notices]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Class Action Fairness Act Notices]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[McLennan v. LG Electronics USA, product defect, Dist. New Jersey, Case No. 10-3604, final hearing not yet scheduled, 12,162 Ohio class members, class counsel James Cecchi]]></description>
     <pubDate>Thu, 29 Dec 2011 12:51:34 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/December-2011/Class-Action-Fairness-Act-Notices]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/December-2011/New-Cases-in-Online-Public-Inspection-File]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[New Cases in Online Public Inspection File]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[Cicero v. American Satellite, Inc. (Franklin Cty.), 2011-Ohio-4918, PIF 2977]]></description>
     <pubDate>Thu, 29 Dec 2011 12:54:39 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/December-2011/New-Cases-in-Online-Public-Inspection-File]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/December-2011/Ohio-Supreme-Court-out-of-state-lawyers-may-not-of]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Ohio Supreme Court: out-of-state lawyers may not offer debt settlement legal services to Ohioans]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[When looking for debt settlement lawyers online, you must find an attorney who has the ability to practice law in Ohio, not just firms that advertise themselves as &ldquo;national firms.&rdquo;]]></description>
     <pubDate>Thu, 29 Dec 2011 12:49:52 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/December-2011/Ohio-Supreme-Court-out-of-state-lawyers-may-not-of]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/July-2012/CLASS-ACTION-COMPLAINTS]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Class Action Complaints]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<p>
	Faleder v. The Proctor &amp; Gamble Co., Cuyahoga Cty. Case No. CV 12 779534, product misrepresentation, class counsel Marvin Schiff</p>
<p>
	Jodka v. City of Cleveland, Cuyahoga Cty. Case No. CV-12-784372, red light camera fines, class counsel John Murray</p>
]]></description>
     <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/July-2012/CLASS-ACTION-COMPLAINTS]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/July-2012/CLASS-ACTION-FAIRNESS-ACT-NOTICES]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[ Class Action Fairness Act Notices]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<p>
	Underwood v. IFDA Services, Inc., breach of fiduciary duty, Southern Dist. Illinois, Case No. 09-390, final hearing June 12, 2012, 48 Ohio class members, class counsel Robert Foote</p>
]]></description>
     <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/July-2012/CLASS-ACTION-FAIRNESS-ACT-NOTICES]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/July-2012/Community-Fraud-Forums]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Community Fraud Forums]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[This summer the Ohio Attorney General's Office is hosting regional Community Fraud Forums to discuss scams affecting consumers and small businesses.]]></description>
     <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2012 16:44:20 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/July-2012/Community-Fraud-Forums]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/July-2012/New-Cases-in-Online-Public-Inspection-File]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[New Cases in Online Public Inspection File]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<div>
	<i>In re Scott Lowenstine, dba Air Duct Doctor</i>, AVC No. 436908, <a _fcksavedurl="http://www.opif.ag.state.oh.us/secured/casedetail.aspx?issueID=3695&amp;pif=10003006" href="http://www.opif.ag.state.oh.us/secured/casedetail.aspx?issueID=3695&amp;pif=10003006" target="_blank"><u><font color="#0066cc">PIF 3006</font></u></a></div>
<div>
	&nbsp;</div>
<div>
	Supplier agrees to refrain from the following acts and practices which constitute unfair and deceptive acts and practices in violation of the CSPA</div>
]]></description>
     <pubDate>Tue, 17 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/July-2012/New-Cases-in-Online-Public-Inspection-File]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/March-2011/Class-Action-Complaints-Filed]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Class Action Complaints Filed]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[In re McNeil Consumer Healthcare Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, Eastern Dist. Penn., Case No. MDL No. 2190, class counsel Donald Haviland<br />]]></description>
     <pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/March-2011/Class-Action-Complaints-Filed]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/March-2011/Class-Action-Fairness-Act-Notices]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Class Action Fairness Act Notices]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<p>
	Smith v. Gaiam, Inc., advertising misrepresentations, Dist. Colorado, Case No. 09-2545, final hearing not yet scheduled, 23787 Ohio class members, class counsel Tracy Rezvani</p>
<p>
	Cappetta v. G.C. Services, LP, FCRA, Eastern Dist. Virginia, Case No. 08-288, final hearing not yet scheduled, 1,735 Ohio class members, class counsel Leonard Bennett</p>
<p>
	In re Quantcast Advertising Cookie Litigation, computer privacy, Central Dist. California, Case No. 10-5484, final hearing not yet scheduled, unknown number of Ohio class members, class counsel Scott Kamber</p>
]]></description>
     <pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/March-2011/Class-Action-Fairness-Act-Notices]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/March-2011/New-Cases-in-Online-Public-Inspection-File]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[New Cases in Online Public Inspection File]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<h4>
	ADVERTISEMENTS</h4>
<p>
	<em>State ex rel Cordray v. The Dannon Company, Inc</em>., Franklin Cty. Case No. 10 CVH-12-18225, PIF 2917</p>
<p>
	Defendant is enjoined from making any express or implied claims that any of its products may be used in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of any disease.&nbsp; The products covered by this Consent Judgment are any yogurt, including but not limited to, Activia yogurt, any dairy drink, and any food or drink containing a probiotic, including but not limited to, DanActive.&nbsp; Representations that Defendant&#39;s products can be used for the temporary relief of diarrhea, constipation, or irregularity are not prohibited if, at the time the representations are made, Defendant possesses and relies upon competent and reliable scientific evidence that substantiates that the regulation is true.&nbsp; Defendant to pay $21,000,000.00 to the settling states, to be divided among them.&nbsp; Ohio to receive $861,111.11.</p>
]]></description>
     <pubDate>Thu, 10 Mar 2011 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/March-2011/New-Cases-in-Online-Public-Inspection-File]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/May-2011/Class-Action-Complaints-Filed]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Class Action Complaints Filed]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<em>Trohoske v. Chicago Title Co</em>., Cuyahoga Cty. Case No. CV 11 752441, class counsel John Gold]]></description>
     <pubDate>Mon, 23 May 2011 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/May-2011/Class-Action-Complaints-Filed]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/May-2011/Class-Action-Fairness-Act-Notices]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Class Action Fairness Act Notices]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[Smith v. GB Collects, LLC, FDCPA, Case No. 09-5917, final hearing March 15, 2011, 3 Ohio class members, class counsel Donald Doherty<br />
<br />
Rosen v. Unilever United States, product misrepresentations, Northern Dist. California, Case No. 09-2563, final hearing June 20, 2011, unknown number of Ohio class members, class counsel Michael Reese<br />
<br />
Davis v. VideoEgg, Inc., computer privacy, Central Dist. California, Case No. 10-7112, final hearing June 13, 2011, unknown number of Ohio class members, class counsel David Parisi]]></description>
     <pubDate>Mon, 23 May 2011 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/May-2011/Class-Action-Fairness-Act-Notices]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/May-2011/New-Cases-In-Online-Public-Inspection-File]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[New Cases In Online Public Inspection File]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<h4>DEBT ADJUSTERS ACT</h4>
<p><em>Fithian v. Accredited Financial, Inc.</em>, Knox Cty. Case No. 10 OT 06-352, PIF 2928</p>
<p>Defendants  were in the business of offering consumers debt counseling and debt  adjusting services.&nbsp; The Court found that Defendants violated the CSPA  by: 1) misrepresenting their success rate and the results of their  program prior to Plaintiff signing the contract, 2) falsely promising to  provide Plaintiff with third-party legal assistance and failing to  provide that assistance when Plaintiff was sued by a creditor in  Defendants' program, 3) charging illegal fees pursuant to R.C.  4710.02(B), and 4) knowing at the time the transaction with Plaintiff  was entered into that Plaintiff would not receive a substantial benefit  from the transaction.&nbsp; The Court found that Plaintiff had suffered  damages of $4,237.38, which it trebled to $12,712.14.&nbsp; In addition, the  Court found that Plaintiff was entitled to punitive damages due to  Defendants' reckless, wanton, willful and gross conduct, and awarded  $42,373.80 in punitive damages.&nbsp; The Court found that Plaintiff was  entitled to attorney fees and awarded $1,449.00.</p>]]></description>
     <pubDate>Mon, 23 May 2011 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/May-2011/New-Cases-In-Online-Public-Inspection-File]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/May-2012/Class-Action-Complaints]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Class Action Complaints]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<div>
	<i>Wroughton v. Gentek Building Products, Inc.</i>, ND Ohio Case No. 11-2719, product defect, class counsel Randy Richardson</div>
]]></description>
     <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2012 12:37:44 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/May-2012/Class-Action-Complaints]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/May-2012/Class-Action-Fairness-Act-Notices]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Class Action Fairness Act Notices]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<div style="TEXT-ALIGN: left">
	Garrett v. Sharps Compliance, Inc., TCPA, ND Illinois, Case No. 10-4030, final hearing March 1, 2012, unknown number of Ohio class members, class counsel Daniel Edelman</div>
<div>
	&nbsp;</div>
<div>
	In re Verizon Wireless, improper fees, Dist. New Jersey, Case No. 10-1749, final hearing December 2, 2011, 1,266,451 Ohio class members, class counsel Peter Bezek</div>
<div>
	&nbsp;</div>
]]></description>
     <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2012 12:37:11 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/May-2012/Class-Action-Fairness-Act-Notices]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/May-2012/Consumer-Legislation]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Consumer Legislation]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<div>
	<b><a _fcksavedurl="http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=129_SB_223" href="http://www.legislature.state.oh.us/bills.cfm?ID=129_SB_223" target="_blank"><u><font color="#0066cc">SB 223, Cyber Fraud</font></u></a></b> (Senator Bacon) -<span> Allows the Attorney General to investigate the offenses of unauthorized use of property and telecommunications fraud and to modify the penalties for telecommunications fraud. Effective June 8, 2012.</span></div>
]]></description>
     <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2012 12:35:21 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/May-2012/Consumer-Legislation]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/May-2012/New-Cases-in-Online-Public-Inspection-File]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[New Cases in Online Public Inspection File]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<div>
	<i>CompuCredit Corp. v. Greenwood</i>, US S. Ct. Case No. 10-948, <a _fcksavedurl="http://www.opif.ag.state.oh.us/secured/casedetail.aspx?issueID=3680&amp;pif=10002992" href="http://www.opif.ag.state.oh.us/secured/casedetail.aspx?issueID=3680&amp;pif=10002992" target="_blank"><u><font color="#0066cc">PIF 2992</font></u></a></div>
<div>
	&nbsp;</div>
<div>
	The Supreme Court found that the Credit Repair Organizations Act does not preclude enforcement of an arbitration agreement in a lawsuit alleging violations of the Act</div>
]]></description>
     <pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2012 12:53:39 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/May-2012/New-Cases-in-Online-Public-Inspection-File]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/September-2011/Class-Action-Complaints]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Class Action Complaints]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<em>Friedman v. Brink&rsquo;s Home Security, Inc.</em>, Cuyahoga Cty. Case No. CV 11 761379, improper charges, class counsel Jack Landskroner<br />
<br />
<em>Miller v. E I Du Pont Nemours &amp; Co.</em>, ND Ohio Case No. 11-CV-1517, product defect, class counsel John Climaco]]></description>
     <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/September-2011/Class-Action-Complaints]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/September-2011/Class-Action-Fairness-Act-Notices]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[Class Action Fairness Act Notices]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<em>Zaun v. Tuttle</em>, FACTA, Dist. Minnesota, Case No. 10-2191, final hearing not yet scheduled, unknown number of Ohio class members, class counsel Thomas Lyons, Sr.<br />
<br />
<em>Weeks v. Kellogg Co</em>., product misrepresentation, Central Dist. California, Case No. 09-8102, final hearing August 29, 2011, unknown number of Ohio class members, class counsel Gillian Wade]]></description>
     <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/September-2011/Class-Action-Fairness-Act-Notices]]></link>     
</item><item>
     <guid isPermaLink="true"><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/September-2011/New-Cases-In-Online-Public-Inspection-File]]></guid>
     <title><![CDATA[New Cases In Online Public Inspection File]]></title>
     <description><![CDATA[<p>
	<strong>BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY PURCHASERS PROTECTION ACT</strong><br />
	<br />
	<em>State ex rel DeWine v. Maxco Development, Inc.</em>, Franklin Cty. Case No. 06 CVH-03-3245, <a _fcksavedurl="http://www.opif.ag.state.oh.us/secured/casedetail.aspx?issueID=3645&amp;pif=10002960" href="http://www.opif.ag.state.oh.us/secured/casedetail.aspx?issueID=3645&amp;pif=10002960">PIF 2960</a><br />
	<br />
	Defendant violated the Business Opportunity Purchasers Protection Act by: 1) failing to provide purchasers the required ten days to consider the business opportunity agreement prior to execution in violation of R.C. 1334.02(A), 2) making false or misleading statements to purchasers that induced them to enter into the agreement in violation of R.C. 1334.03(B), 3) failing to provide time to review the agreement and applying undue pressure to sign the agreement in violation of R.C. 1334.03(B), 4) making representations that were inconsistent with the disclosures required by R.C. 1334.03(C), 5) failing to integrate material statements and representations into the agreement in violation of R.C. 1334.06(E)(1), and 6) delivering goods and services during the time within which purchasers may cancel the business opportunity in violation of R.C. 1334.06(E)(7).&nbsp; Defendant ordered to pay $35,487.88 in restitution to purchasers and $100,000 as a civil penalty.</p>
]]></description>
     <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2011 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
     <link><![CDATA[http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Files/Briefing-Room/Newsletters/Consumer-Law-Advisor/September-2011/New-Cases-In-Online-Public-Inspection-File]]></link>     
</item></channel>
</rss>
