The New Jersey Supreme Court addressed several issues involving commercial law this past term. The court dealt with four cases involving the Consumer Fraud Act (CFA), testing the limits of what constitutes unlawful conduct, determining whether ascertainable loss had been demonstrated in order to warrant an award of attorney fees, calculating damages under the CFA and determining whether attorney fee provisions in landlord/tenant leases were in violation of the CFA. The court also addressed just compensation calculation when a potential zoning change is at issue. Finally, the court addressed two issues affecting insurers. In one case, the court considered the allocation of cleanup costs between solvent and insolvent insurers. In the other case, it considered whether an insurer had a direct contribution claim against a co-insurer for defense costs.
Consumer Fraud Act
Addressing the interplay of the CFA and certain nursing home agreements, the court considered in Manahawkin Convalescent v. O’Neill, 217 N.J. 99 (2014), whether a collection provision in a nursing home agreement violated the Nursing Home Act (NHA), the CFA, or the Truth-in-Consumer Contract, Warranty, and Notice Act (TCCWNA).
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
