10 Consumer Protection and State Attorneys General 10 Consumer Protection and State Attorneys General
10.1 Introduction 10.1 Introduction
10.1.1 General Introduction 10.1.1 General Introduction
Every state and the District of Columbia has authorized its attorney general to enforce state consumer protection statutes in state court on behalf of their citizens who were victims of “unfair or deceptive” practices in the marketplace. While each state differs on the breadth of its coverage and the remedies available of its Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices Act (UDAP), it is a core duty of every attorney general to be involved in consumer protection. Additionally, due to the breadth of pre-suit investigatory authority using a Civil Investigative Demand (CID), AGs have powerful tools not available to most civil litigants. AGs use their broad consumer protection authority to investigate and sue anyone engaged in “unfair or deceptive” practices either in single state actions or as part of multistate coalitions.
10.1.2 Detailed Roadmap to Core Readings 10.1.2 Detailed Roadmap to Core Readings
This class focuses on consumer protection. The first reading is the MA consumer protection statute to get a sense of the scope of these statutes. Using the Uber readings, you should ask about the need for and the role of AG consumer protection today.
The next set of readings examine the AG's pre-suit investigative authority. The case from MN and the article about the TX use of the consumer laws should give you a sense of the breadth of that authority.
The next few readings are examples of single state consumer protection actions, first MN against Accretive, and then WA against Comcast. In light of the national business models involved, you should also ask why these were single state lawsuits and not multistate consumer actions.
Concerning AG multistate cases, we look first at the tobacco litigation to understand the history and dynamics of these cases. The next reading considers a few old settlements involving DirecTV, and you should ask what is the significance of three multistate cases against DirecTV. From the Nolette website, pick a multistate case against some company that interests you and determine how many states were involved, what it was about, and what happened. The Lynch article raises the issue whether there is something wrong about state AGs setting national economic policy through multistate litigation.
The last set of readings look at the increasing role of arbitration in private litigation and its possible impact on AG consumer protection actions.
10.2. Massachusetts Consumer Protection Statute: M.G.L. ch. 93A
10.3 Civil Investigative Demand (CID) Authority 10.3 Civil Investigative Demand (CID) Authority
10.3.1. Madison Equities, Inc. v. Attorney General, 967 N.W.2d 667 (Minn. 2021) (edited)
10.3.2. TX AG Seattle Children's Hospital CID (Nov. 17, 2023)
10.3.3. Seattle Children's Hospital sues TX AG over trans patient records, Tex. Tribune (Dec. 21, 2023)
10.3.4. TX Supreme Court Gives AG Win on Migrant Shelter Case, Tex. Tribune (Jan. 9, 2025)
10.4 Single State Consumer Protection Matters 10.4 Single State Consumer Protection Matters
10.4.1. MN AG v. Accretive (various articles) (2008 – 2013)
10.4.2. Judge Finds Comcast Violated the Consumer Protection Act Nearly Half a Million Times, WA AG website (June 6, 2019)
10.4.3. WA AG ordered to pay $4.2 million in fees in consumer case, Yahoo! Finance (Oct. 18, 2023)
10.4.4. WA AG Vastly Expanded his Office to Focus on Consumer Cases, Seattle Times (Oct. 13, 2024)
10.4.5. TX AG is stretching the boundaries of consumer protection laws to pursue political targets, Tex. Tribune (May 30, 2024)
10.5 Multistate Consumer Protection Actions 10.5 Multistate Consumer Protection Actions
The integration of our economy and the rise of technology has made it essential for attorneys general to work cooperatively across state lines if they are to engage in the traditional affirmative enforcement of state laws covering matters such as consumer protection, antitrust, charities, medicaid fraud and illegal internet related. activity Over the last thirty years AG offices have developed protocols for such cooperation and this section explores that process.
10.5.1. Thomas Schmerling, Stag Hunting with the State AG: Anti-Tobacco Litigation and the Emergence of Cooperation Among State Attorneys General, 25 Law & Policy 429 (2003)
10.5.2. DIRECTV Settlements Articles (1998, 2005, 2010)
10.5.3. Multistate Consumer Actions and Settlements, Website of Prof. Paul Nolette, Marquette University
10.5.4. Jason Lynch, Federalism, Separation of Powers, and the Role of State Attorneys General in Multistate Litigation, 101 Colum. L. Rev. 1998 (2001) (edited)
Jason Lynch, Federalism, Separation of Powers, and the Role of State Attorneys General in Multistate Litigation, 101 Colum. L. Rev. 1998 (2001) (edited) (Links to an external site.)
10.6 The Role of Mandatory Arbitration in Consumer Protection 10.6 The Role of Mandatory Arbitration in Consumer Protection
10.6.1. AT&T Mobility LLC v. Concepcion, 563 U.S. 333 (2011) (edited)
10.6.2. Rent-A-Center, Inc. v. Iowa Civil Rights Commission, 843 N.W.2d 727 (Iowa 2014) (edited)
10.6.3. Arbitration wins, again, at the U.S. Supreme Court, Reuters (June 27, 2023)
10.7 Supplemental Reading 10.7 Supplemental Reading
10.7.1. TX AG Amazon-Parler CID (Jan. 13, 2021)
10.7.2. AG Paxton Issues Civil Investigative Demands to Five LeadingTech Companies Regarding Discriminatory and Biased Policies, TX AG website and Practices (Jan. 13, 2021)
10.7.3. DC Judge Says MO AG Can't Demand Documents from Media Matters, Law360 (Aug. 26, 2024)
10.7.4. Judge presses IN AG for 'reasonable cause' on CID, Courier & Press (Feb. 8, 2025)
10.7.5. FL AG Announces 'Climate Cartel' Investigation, Law360 (July 28, 2025)
10.7.6. Baldwin-United Accord Criticized, N.Y. Times (Feb. 5, 1985)
10.7.7. Henry Butler and Joshua Wright, Are State Consumer Protection Acts Really Little-FTC Acts?, 63 Fla. L. Rev. 163 (2011) (edited)