Where's The Harm? NJ Justices Offer Consumer Law Insights

By Christina Guerola Sarchio, Amisha Patel, Jacob Grubman and Tharuni Jayaraman (April 18, 2018, 2:10 PM EDT) -- On Monday, the New Jersey Supreme Court proffered some much-needed clarity on the definition of "aggrieved consumer" in assessing liability under the New Jersey Truth-in-Consumer Contract, Warranty and Notice Act, or TCCWNA.[1] The court's unanimous decision in David Spade v. Select Comfort Corp. will undoubtedly cause plaintiffs to think twice before pursuing TCCWNA claims based on standard terms of service, where individuals merely complain about the inclusion or omission of certain language in a seller's terms and conditions and are unable to prove actual harm suffered as a result of the purportedly offending language.

While this highly anticipated ruling strikes yet another blow...

Stay ahead of the curve

In the legal profession, information is the key to success. You have to know what’s happening with clients, competitors, practice areas, and industries. Law360 provides the intelligence you need to remain an expert and beat the competition.


  • Access to case data within articles (numbers, filings, courts, nature of suit, and more.)
  • Access to attached documents such as briefs, petitions, complaints, decisions, motions, etc.
  • Create custom alerts for specific article and case topics and so much more!

TRY LAW360 FREE FOR SEVEN DAYS

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!