Mo business launches effort to promote bill limiting consumer lawsuit damages
Wednesday morning, business backers of a new group – called the Missouri Justice Alliance, a project of the Missouri Chamber Legal Foundation — will hold an event in the state Capitol to promote HB 2241.
The bill, now in the House Judiciary Committee, “would seek to curb frivolous lawsuits like the ‘Great American Pants Suit,’ ” the group says in a release.
The suit in question, which got a lot of publicity last year, deals with a man on the East Coast who sued a dry cleaners for millions of dollars because of a lost pair of suit pants.
The featured guest at Wednesday’s 10 a.m. news conference is Chris Manning, a lawyer who successfully defended the family dry cleaning business from the $67 million lawsuit.
HB 2241 would limit damages in cases where a consumer sues for faulty merchandise to ” ‘out-of-pocket loss’ (which) means an amount of money equal to the difference between the amount paid by the consumer for the good or service and the actual market value of the good or service that the consumer actually received. In order to recover damages in an individual action under this section, each person shall be required to prove that the method, act, or practice declared unlawful by section 407.020 caused such person to enter into the transaction that resulted in such person’s damages…”
To read the full text, click here.
The Missouri Justice Alliance says it “is a partnership of more than 20 Missouri businesses and associations supporting legal reform…”
Critics contend that the bill would limit consumers’ rights.
This bill is terrible for both consumers and businesses and I can’t believe our legislature would seriously entertain it. Where is Jay Nixon, the great defender of the little guy? I love the way commercial interests grab onto one ridiculous example of a frivolous lawsuit and use it to justify stripping rights away from consumers who have truly been victimized.
Right now consumers can file private lawsuits when deceptive or unfair acts or practices have been employed against them and they’ve suffered a loss. That’s pretty reasonable. If you buy new computer and it doesn’t work or isn’t how it was advertised, you should be able to get your money back, right? I guess the Missouri legislature thinks that scenario is a bit unfair to the shyster businesses who rip off Missourians.
Under the proposed changes, consumers will only be able to seek “out of pocket” losses, which are sometimes much harder to prove. AND it appears they won’t be able to sue at all if the transaction is one regulated by the FTC. Like almost every consumer transaction. So, basically there’s going to be no private way for consumers to address this terrible conduct under the Consumer Protection laws. Again, where is Jay Nixon, Missouri’s “top cop?”
Has Jay NIxon even weighed in on this? Maybe he doesn’t want to alienate commercial interests during an election year. If that’s the case, shame on him.
Where is Jeff Harris? Isn’t he going to be our AG candidate in the fall? What’s his position on this piece of trash?
It’s legislation like this that makes Missouri look like a bunch of rubes with a bunch of rube legislators. Aren’t there more pressing issues for our state right now than protecting the poor, downtrodden rip-off artists and scam businesses????
I’d also like to know where the defenders of the people are when a bill like SB1038 can get anywhere non-the-less a do pass with emergency clause. Is one man, one vote dead just as ethics and integrity are in politics?
We voted to limit campaign contributions, yet our elected representatives decide to turn a deaf ear to the people in favor of larger coffers for their campaigns. This is outrageous!!!
The bill comes up for a vote soon. I urge every thinking, freedom loving Missourian to contact their State Rep. and strongly urge them to vote NO.
Anyone who has any experience with the present consumer law knows that is far from “reasonable” as another poster suggests. It is a plaintiff’s dream. It is very broad, very vague, and can apply to anything. As the previous poster suggests, if the plaintiff thinks he was treated “unfair” then he can sue for punitives. The concept of “fair” is pretty subjective. That’s why the law has evolved over the years such that plaintiff’s normally sue using developed theories of the law such as fraud, conversion, negligence, slandeer, breach of contract, etc. Those theories have elements that one must plead and prove in order to succeed. Those theories have served our justice system well for many years. Now we have added a new theory based on “unfair”? That is rediculous. Businesses are right to call for a law limiting frivolous lawsuits.