Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=1708175
 
 

Citations (1)



 


 



State Consumer Protection Acts: An Empirical Investigation of Private Litigation


Joshua D. Wright


Federal Trade Commission; George Mason University School of Law

November 12, 2010

Searle Civil Justice Institute Preliminary Report, 2009

Abstract:     
Since the 1960s, all fifty states and the District of Columbia have enacted state consumer protection acts (CPAs). These acts were a response to increased demands for consumer protection and business regulation, criticism of the Federal Trade Commission’s consumer protection efforts, and a sense that common law causes of action available to consumers were too strict. Originally considered "mini-FTC Acts," CPAs were intended to increase the resources available to pursue consumer protection cases. Their proponents see them as a vital complement to the FTC’s limited consumer protection efforts, necessary to allow plaintiffs to overcome the strict limitations on common law causes of action and to provide adequate incentives for individuals to challenge unfair and deceptive business practices.

However, there is increasing concern that these acts do more than simply supplement FTC enforcement, but expand the scope of consumer protection litigation beyond well-established avenues of consumer protection. Critics fear that by combining private rights of action, generous remedies, and vague definitions of illegal conduct, without including any requirement that CPA litigation serve the public interest, CPAs may encourage frivolous claims and attorney-driven class actions that ultimately hurt, rather than protect consumers.

The Searle Civil Justice Institute (SCJI) seeks to inform policy debates with systematically collected and rigorously analyzed empirical data. Despite clear relevance to the key policy questions, there is an absence of such analysis on state consumer protection acts. Little systematic information is available on magnitude, trends, or nature of litigation under state CPAs.

In this Preliminary Report, the SCJI State Consumer Protection Acts Task Force begins the process of creating a more complete picture of state consumer protection acts. The SCJI has engaged in a massive data collection and analysis effort, collecting information on CPAs in all fifty states, assembling a database of about 17,000 court decisions, and closely examining 500 of these decisions. The SCJI also commissioned a panel of consumer protection experts to serve as a "Shadow Federal Trade Commission." This Shadow FTC examined a sample of consumer protection decisions and considered how they would fare under relevant FTC standards. The analysis presented in this Preliminary Report was conducted according to the SCJI Research Protocol and has been subjected to independent peer review. The results contained in this Preliminary Report fully and accurately reflect the results of SCJI’s data collection and analysis.

This Preliminary Report marks the beginning of rigorous analytical examination of state consumer protection acts. It is denoted as preliminary for two reasons. First, SCJI intends to continue its empirical work on CPAs by developing an analysis of the impact of state CPAs on consumer welfare. Second, SCJI is prepared to refine its work based on future studies, critiques, and ongoing debate.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 90

Accepted Paper Series





Download This Paper

Date posted: November 14, 2010  

Suggested Citation

Wright, Joshua D., State Consumer Protection Acts: An Empirical Investigation of Private Litigation (November 12, 2010). Searle Civil Justice Institute Preliminary Report, 2009 . Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1708175

Contact Information

Joshua D. Wright (Contact Author)
Federal Trade Commission ( email )
601 New Jersey Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20580
United States
George Mason University School of Law ( email )
3301 Fairfax Drive
Arlington, VA 22201
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 960
Downloads: 226
Download Rank: 80,009
Citations:  1

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.376 seconds