Search Site
Menu

Supreme Court Rules Victory Under CFA Does Not Guarantee Award of Attorney Fees

The New Jersey Supreme Court recently ruled in Perez v. Professionally Green, LLC, et al. that a prevailing Plaintiff is not entitled to receive an award of attorney fees under the Consumer Fraud Act (CFA) if they cannot prove an ascertainable loss relating to the violation. It was a decision that slightly weakened New Jersey’s consumer fraud protections, which are amongst the strongest in the country.

The case involved a claim by a homeowner against a home improvement contractor regarding the installation of a swimming pool. The contractor failed to include a start or end date for the work in the contract as required by New Jersey law, and in violation of the CFA. However, the homeowner could not prove that they had suffered any damages as a result of the violation. For this reason the trial court decided not to award Plaintiff with attorney’s fees under the CFA. Plaintiff subsequently appealed the decision, and the Appellate Division reversed, holding that Plaintiff was entitled to attorney fees simply by the mere fact that they were able to prove a violation under the CFA. The Defendant contractor then petitioned the Supreme Court, which was granted.

The Supreme Court held in a unanimous decision that in addition to establishing a CFA violation, a private plaintiff must demonstrate that the violation resulted in an “ascertainable loss of moneys or property, real or personal.” If a plaintiff demonstrates both a violation and a resulting ascertainable loss, the CFA provides broad relief that may include an award of attorneys’ fees. However, when a trial court grants a defendant’s motion for involuntary dismissal of plaintiffs’ CFA claim due to the fact that no bona fide ascertainable loss claim exists within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 56:8-19, as they did here, then plaintiffs are not entitled to attorneys’ fees.

Here at Lieberman Blecher & Sinkevich our attorneys are well-versed in Consumer Fraud actions and have assisted many clients through the appeals process. Our attorneys are experienced with complex litigation, including issues that involve redevelopment, hazardous site remediation, underground storage tanks, and regulatory matters.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Our Attorneys

Recent Twitter Posts

  • Trenton Water Works has removed 25 percent of lead pipes throughout its service area. https://t.co/KUvhMsJlvU
    5 days ago
  • Opposition grows to big warehouses in small NJ towns. https://t.co/CMjgYaPMRP
    5 days ago
  • Groups plead with Governor Murphy to stop plans for new gas-fired power plant along the Passaic River in Newark. https://t.co/0yODyXEI3C
    5 days ago
  • Murphy Administration releases mapping tool to help NJ residents identify lead exposure risks in housing. https://t.co/oRL7gPVoeq
    2 months ago

Recent Blog Posts

Environmental Insurance Dispute to be Heard in New Jersey courts

On December 30, 2021 the Appellate Division of the Superior Court decided Getty Prop. Corp. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. Getty Properties Corp. (“Getty”) filed an appeal
Read More
Environmental Insurance Dispute to be Heard in New Jersey courts

Governor Murphy’s NJDEP Proposes New Rule to Limit Carbon Dioxide Emissions

New Jersey Governor Phil Murphy’s administration proposed a new rule to combat greenhouse gas emissions, just before the start of his second term in office. The New Jersey Department of
Read More
Governor Murphy’s NJDEP Proposes New Rule to Limit Carbon Dioxide Emissions

Municipal Clerk can Accept Electronic Signatures

On November 30, 2021, the Appellate Division further enforced and upheld a new staple of the Covid-19 world: electronic signatures. In Township Of Montclair Committee of Petitioners et al. v.
Read More
Municipal Clerk can Accept Electronic Signatures

Appellate Division Declines to Allow Developer’s Four-Month-Late DOT Permit Appeal, Citing No Change in Circumstances

A Maple Shade Township developer’s appeal of permit conditions was untimely when they appealed four months past the deadline and without any change in circumstances justifying deadline relaxation, the Appellate
Read More
Appellate Division Declines to Allow Developer’s Four-Month-Late DOT Permit Appeal, Citing No Change in Circumstances

In the media

  • Gulf Coast Town Center facing foreclosure

    Naples Daily News, September 16, 2015

    Wells Fargo filed a lawsuit Sept. 8 against an affiliate of CBL & Associates, the owners of the decadeold, 1.2 million-square-foot mall in south Fort Myers for a $190.9 million unpaid loan. The center has 94 stores on 204 acres, with such anchors as Super Target, Belk, Best Buy, Dick’s Sporting Goods, Marshalls and Costco...

    Read More
  • Town liable for private company's leaking underground tanks, court rules

    NJ.com Jul 26, 2017

    CRANFORD -- A couple that owned a businesses in town and became sick from leaking underground tanks owned by an adjacent business can sue the township for damages because the tanks were partially ...

    Read More
  • Dark Waters: How a Class Action Catapulted NJ to Forefront of 'Forever Chemicals' Battle

    NJ Law Journal Jan 09, 2020

    As property owners become increasingly aware of PFAS contamination, and as individuals exposed to PFAS learn of the health risks associated with exposure, liability will likely affect entire supply chains.

    Read More
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
Contact Our Firm

Quick Contact Form