Coordinators

Other Contributors

About Us

www.clpblog.org

The contributors to the Consumer Law & Policy blog are lawyers and law professors who practice, teach, or write about consumer law and policy. The blog is hosted by Public Citizen Litigation Group, but the views expressed here are solely those of the individual contributors (and don't necessarily reflect the views of institutions with which they are affiliated). To view the blog's policies, please click here.

« Theresa Amato: Wrap Contracts Are Like Asbestos | Main | FDA goes after DNA testing outfit »

Monday, November 25, 2013

Comments

Jono

I see 16 December was the deadline for Kleargear's response.
Is there any update (if it is possible to provide it)?

andrews

For some reason, the statute does not appear to allow a private cause of action under 1691s-2(a), which would have been the more obvious path. Based on the facts stated in the letter, it seems certain that Kleargear knew that their reports were untruthful.

Thanks, Pub Cit, for taking on a case that clearly needs to be taken. Probably the rest of us come out better if Kleargear determines to fight, since we might get some case law out of it. We'll also get a good example, what I like to think of as ``heads on pikes'' to warn other potential bandits.

Sam

Thank you Public Citizen!

James Macpherson

Great work! With all the negative media reports, I can't see KlearGear surviving this debacle - which should serve as the perfect warning to other companies attempting to enforce a “non-disparagement clause.”

M Jackson

When did freedom of speech have such a HIGH PRICE TAG on your thoughts and opinions of that particular company? I would gather a petition for those to sign and send to White House; city officials and anyone else that could help me turn this around for someone.
I pray that the Palmer's be blessed with 1/2 million or million dollar lawsuit and win so that they can make example out of Kleargear and anyone that wants to follow in their lane. Silly retailers 'TRICKS ARE FOR KIDS"

Anton Sherwood

The third demand ought to include "nor assert any claim based on such clause in past versions of the Terms of Use".

Stephen

The greatest part of me wants to see this resolved for the Palmers as quickly as possible.

Then there's this small vindictive part of me that wants to see this go to trial so that PC can thoroughly curb-stomp these KlearGear clowns into legal oblivion.

John Palmer

I approve of this action :)

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Subscribe to CL&P

RSS/Atom Feed

To receive a daily email of Consumer Law & Policy content, enter your email address here:

Search CL&P Blog

Recent Posts

September 2016

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30