Strength of Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices Law - 50-State Detail (Scorecard based on data as of 1/15/08)

Transcription

1 Strength of Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Law - 5-State Detail (Scorecard based on data as of /5/8) State Potential Alabama No, Ala. Code 8-9-5(27). No, Ala. Code 8-9-5(27). No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Ala. Code relief No, Ala. Code 8-9-8(a). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Ala. Code 8-9-(b). No, Ala. Code 8-9-8(b) (allowing appointment of a receiver whenever a person who has been ordered to make restitution under this section has failed to do so within three months ); Nunley v. State, 628 So. 2d 69, 62 (Ala. 993). Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes, Ala. Code 8-9-(b) up to $2 per violation if knowing. No, Ala. Code 8-9-8(c). 7 C Alabama No, Ala. Code 8-9-5(27). No, Ala. Code 8-9-5(27). No, Ala. Code Excludes credit transactions 3 Yes, Ala. Code See Deerman v. ed. Home Loan Mortg. Corp., 955. Supp. 393 (N.D. Ala. 997), aff d without op., 4.3d 43 (th Cir. 998). Excludes insurance transactions () Yes, Ala. Code industries Excludes real estate transactions () No, Ala. Code Excludes post-sale acts () (Alabama courts have not ruled on this question yet). Requires reliance (2) (Alabama courts have not ruled on this question yet). (Alabama courts have not ruled on this question yet). Yes, Ala. Code 8-9-(e).

2 compensatory damages No, Ala. Code 8-9-(a)(). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Ala. Code 8-9-(a). Precludes class actions (2) 2 Yes, Ala. Code 8-9-(f) No multiple damages () No, Ala. Code 8-9-(a)(2). Awarded 3 Alaska State Potential No, Alaska Stat (a). No, Alaska Stat (a). No, Alaska Stat No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Alaska Stat relief No, Alaska Stat (a). No, Alaska Stat (b). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Alaska Stat Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded No, Alaska Stat ($ to $25,). Yes. 9 A Alaska No, Alaska Stat (a). No, Alaska Stat (a). No, Alaska Stat (b), and state has adopted substantive rules under Alaska Stat Excludes credit transactions Excludes insurance transactions () industries No. Alaska Stat (a)(9) (defining goods or services to include those provided in connection with a consumer credit transaction or with a transaction involving an indebtedness secured by the consumer s residence ); (b) (exemption for acts or transactions regulated under Alaska Banking Code is inapplicable to transactions between banks and their customers, borrowers, depositors); Smallwood v. Central Peninsula General Hosp., 5 P.3d 39, 329 (Alaska 26). Yes, O.K. Lumber Co., Inc. v. Providence Washington Ins. Co., 759 P.2d 523 (Alaska 988).

3 Excludes real estate transactions () No, Alaska Code (a)(9) (defining "goods or services" to include those provided in connection with a consumer credit transaction or with a transaction involving an indebtedness secured by the borrower's residence"). Excludes post-sale acts () No, State v. O Neill Investigations, 69 P.2d 52 (Alaska 98). Requires reliance (2) No, Odom v. airbanks Memorial Hosp., 999 P.2d 23, 32 (Alaska 2). Alaska courts have not yet addressed this issue. No. Alaska Stat only requires pre-suit notice when the consumer seeks an injunction. compensatory damages No, Alaska Stat (c). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) 2 Yes, Alaska Stat Precludes class actions (2) No multiple damages () No, Alaska Stat (c). Awarded 7 C Arizona State Potential No, Ariz. Rev. Stat Yes, Ariz. Rev. Stat (A) only authorizes procedural rules. No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Ariz. Rev. Stat relief Yes, Ariz. Rev. Stat (A) requires a showing of intent that others rely. No, Ariz. Rev. Stat (A). No, Ariz. Rev. Stat (A). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Ariz. Rev. Stat (A). Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes, Ariz. Rev. Stat (A) ($, per violation if willful). 4 No, Ariz. Rev. Stat (A) (allowing court to prohibit defendant from engaging in a specified trade or occupation). Arizona No, Ariz. Rev. Stat

4 Excludes credit transactions Yes. No, Villegas v. Transamerica in. Servs., Inc., 78 P.2d 78 (Ariz. App. 985). Excludes insurance transactions () Not yet clearly decided. industries Excludes real estate transactions () No, Ariz. Rev. Stat (5) (defining merchandise to include real estate). Excludes post-sale acts () Yes. Although there is no definitive ruling, see Walker v. Gallegos, 67.Supp.2d 5, 7 (D. Ariz. 2). Requires reliance (2) No. Not yet clearly resolved. See Peery v. Hansen, 585 P.2d 574, 577 (Ariz. App. 978) (holding, over strong dissent, that reliance is required); Siemer v. Associates irst Capital Corp, 2 WL (D. Ariz. 2) (stating that reliance is required, but finding that simply purchasing the product amounts to reliance). compensatory damages Two-way or no attorney fees (2) 2 No, Dunlap v. Jimmy GMC of Tucson, Inc., 666 P.2d 83 (Ariz. App. 983). No, Sellinger v. reeway Mobile Home Sales, Inc., 52 P.2d 9 (Ariz. 974) (finding that Arizona s UDAP statute creates an implied private right of action for damages). Yes, Sellinger v. reeway Mobile Home Sales, Inc., 52 P.2d 9 (Ariz. 974), Precludes class actions (2) See, e.g., Qwest Corp. v. Kelly, 59 P.3d 789 (Ariz. App. 22). No multiple damages () Yes. Awarded 3 Arkansas State Potential No, Ark. Code (a), (a)(). No, Ark. Code (a) (prefatory language) & (a)() (catchcall). No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Ark. Code See Ark. Code (a) and (a)(). relief No, Ark. Code (a)(). No, Ark. Code (a)(2). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Ark. Code (a). Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded No, Ark. Code (a): $, per violation. No, Ark. Code (b). 8

5 B Arkansas Excludes credit transactions Excludes insurance transactions () industries Excludes real estate transactions () Excludes post-sale acts () Requires reliance (2) No, Ark. Code (a), (a)(). No, Ark. Code (a) (prefatory language) & (a)() (catchcall). No, Ark. Code (a) (2) through (9). No. There is no definitive ruling yet. See Anderson v. Stewart, 366 Ark. 23, 26 WL 8892 (Ark. 26). Yes. Jones v. Unum Life Ins. Co., 26 WL (E.D. Ark., Nov. 29, 26), while not binding on Arkansas courts, creates an impediment for consumers. No. See Ark. Code (a)() (prohibiting any other unconscionable, false, or deceptive act or practice in business, commerce, or trade ). No. No. See Ark. Code (a)() (prohibiting any other unconscionable, false, or deceptive act or practice in business, commerce, or trade ). No. There are no dispositive rulings yet. See relin v. Oakwood Homes Corp., 22 WL (Ark. Cir. 22). There are no rulings requiring clear and convincing evidence. compensatory damages No, Ark. Code (f). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Ark. Code (f). Precludes class actions (2) No. See Anderson v. Stewart, 366 Ark. 23, 26 WL 8892 (Ark. 26). No multiple damages () Yes. Awarded 8 B California State Potential No, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 72. No, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 72. No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Cal. Gov. Code 8, 8. relief No, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 723.

6 No, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 723 (restitution). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 723. Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 723: up to $25 per violation. Yes. No explicit authority in statute. 6 D Excludes credit transactions Excludes insurance transactions () No, No, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 72. No, No, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 72. No, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 75 to No. See, e.g., See, e.g., Perdue v. Crocker Nat l Bank, 72 P.2d 53 (Cal. 985). No, Quelimane co. v. Stewart Title Guaranty Co., 96 P.2d 53 (Cal. 998). industries Excludes real estate transactions () No. See, e.g., Washington Mut. Bank v. Superior Court, 89 Cal. Rptr. 2d 56 (App. 999) (inflated settlement charges for real estate mortgages). Excludes post-sale acts () No. See, e.g., Barquis v. Merchants Collection Assn., 496 P.2d 87 (Cal. 972). Requires reliance (2) No, this issue has not yet been decided.. compensatory damages California No, Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co., 25 Cal. App. 4th 826, 866, 24 P.3d 493 (2). No, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 722 (restitution). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Cal. Civ. Proc. Code 2.5. Precludes class actions (2) No multiple damages () Yes. Awarded 9 A Colorado State Potential 3 Yes.

7 No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Colo. Rev. Stat Yes, mot of the broader substantive prohibitions, such as Colo. Rev. Stat. 6--5()(a), (b), (c), (e), (f), (g), and (o), require knowledge. relief No, Colo. Rev. Stat. 6--(a), No, Colo. Rev. Stat. 6--(a). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Colo. Rev. Stat. 6--2(). Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes, Colo. Rev. Stat. 6--2(): $2 per violation. Yes. Colorado Excludes credit transactions Excludes insurance transactions () industries Excludes real estate transactions () Excludes post-sale acts () 3 Yes. No, Colo. Rev. Stat No, Colo. Rev. Stat. 6--, 6--5()(uu). See also Nienke v. Naiman Group, Ltd., 857 P.2d 446 (Colo. App. 992). No, Showpiece Homes Corp. v. Assurance Co. of America, 38 P.3d 47 (Colo. 2). No, Colo. Rev. Stat. 6--2(8) (defining property ), 6-- (referring to mortgage loans). No, Showpiece Homes Corp. v. Assurance Co. of America, 38 P.3d 47 (Colo. 2). 2 Yes, Rhino Linings USA, Inc. v. Rocky Mountain Rhino Lining, Inc., 62 P.3d 42 (Colo. 23); Hall v. Walter, 969 P.2d 224 (Colo. 998). Requires reliance (2) No, Hall v. Walter, 969 P.2d 224 (Colo. 998) (causation may be established even if the injured party did not rely on the deceptive statements). compensatory damages No, Colo. Rev. Stat. 6--3(2)(a)(I). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Colo. Rev. Stat. 6--3(2)(b). Precludes class actions (2) No multiple damages () No, Colo. Rev. Stat. 6--3(2)(b). Awarded 3 Connecticut

8 State Potential No, Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-b(a). No, Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-b(a). No, Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-b. No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-d. relief No, Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-d(d). No, Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-d(d), (e). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-o(b). Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes, Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-o(b): $5 per violation if willful. No, Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-d(e). 9 A Connecticut Excludes credit transactions Excludes insurance transactions () industries Excludes real estate transactions () No, Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-b(a). No, Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-b(a). No, state has adopted a number of regulations. No, Normand Josef Enterprises, Inc. v. Connecticut Nat. Bank, 646 A.2d 289 (Conn. 994). No, Mead v. Burns, 59 A.2d (Conn. 986) (UDAP statute applies to insurance practices, although it cannot be used to challenge a practice that is not by the state unfair insurance practices statute). No, Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-a (defining trade and commerce to include real property transactions). Excludes post-sale acts () See, e.g., Pabon v. Recko, 22. Supp. 2d 3 (D. Conn. 2) Requires reliance (2) No, Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-g(a). No, Hinchliffe v. American Motors Corporation, 84 Conn. 67, 67, 44 A.2d 8 (98). compensatory damages No, Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-g(a). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Conn. Gen. Stat. g(d).

9 Precludes class actions (2) No, Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-g(b). No multiple damages () Awarded 9 A No, although Conn. Gen. Stat. 42-g(a) authorizes punitive damages. Delaware State Potential No, Del. Code Ann. tit. 6, 253(a). Yes. No presuit investigatory powers (2) Yes, Del. Code Ann. Tit. 29, 254(4), 258 relief No, Del. Code Ann. tit. 6, 2522, No, Del. Code Ann. tit. 6, No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Del. Code Ann. tit. 6, 2522(b). Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes. 5 Yes, Del. Code Ann. tit. 6, 2522(b) - up to $, per violation, but only if willful Delaware No, Del. Code Ann. tit. 6, 253(a). Yes. Excludes credit transactions No. Although courts have not ruled, Del. Code Ann. tit. 6, 253(a) and 25(6) are broad enough to include credit transactions. Excludes insurance transactions () Yes, Del. Code Ann. tit. 6, 253(b). industries Excludes real estate transactions () Excludes post-sale acts () No, Del. Code Ann. tit. 6, 25(6) (defining merchandise to include real estate). No, Del. Code Ann. tit. 6, 253 (prohibiting deception in connection with the sale, lease, or advertisement of any merchandise ); Lony v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co., Inc., 82. Supp. 956 (D. Del. 993).

10 Requires reliance (2) No, Stephenson v. Capano Development, Inc., 462 A.2d 69, 74 (Del. 983), No, See, e.g., Wirt v. Matthews, 22 WL (Del. Com. Pleas 22); Thayer v. Wise Motors, Inc., 994 WL (Del. Com. Pleas 994). compensatory damages Two-way or no attorney fees (2) 2 Yes, no provision for attorney fees. Precludes class actions (2) No multiple damages () Yes. Awarded 3 District of Columbia State Potential No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, D.C. Code (e). No, D.C. Code (r). No, D.C. Code (Corp. Counsel/AG). D.C. Code (a)(2) also gives similar authority to the D.C. Dept. of Consumer & Regulatory Affairs, but it no longer has funding to perform this function. relief No, D.C. Code (a) (Corporation Counsel, which is now the Attorney General s office). D.C. Code (i) also gives this authority to the D.C. Dept. of Consumer & Regulatory Affairs, but it no longer has funding to perform this function. No civil penalty for initial violations (2) Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes. 6 D No, D.C. Code (a) (Corp. Counsel/AG). D.C. Code (i) also gives this authority to the D.C. Dept. of Consumer & Regulatory Affairs, but it no longer has funding to perform this function. No, D.C. Code (a) (Corp. Counsel/AG). D.C. Code (i) also authorizes the Dept. of Consumer & Regulatory Affairs to recover civil penalties, but it no longer has funding to perform this function. Yes, D.C. Code (a) ($ per violation) (Corp. Counsel/AG). D.C. Code (i) also authorizes the Dept. of Consumer & Regulatory Affairs to recover $ per violation, but it no longer has funding to perform this function. District of Columbia

11 No, D.C. Code (e). No, D.C. Code (r). No, D.C. Code Excludes credit transactions No, D.C. Code 28-39(a)(7). Excludes insurance transactions () No, Atwater v. District of Columbia Dept. of Consumer & Regulatory Affairs, 566 A.2d 462 (D.C. 989). industries Excludes real estate transactions () No, D.C. Code 28-39(a)(7). Excludes post-sale acts () Requires reliance (2) No. See, e.g., Osbourne v. Capital City Mortg. Corp., 667 A.2d 32 (D.C. 995) (applying UDAP law to mortgage company s misrepresentation of payoff amount). No, D.C. Code (k). See Wells v. Allstate Ins. Co., 2.R.D. (D.D.C. 22). Yes. Although it may ultimately be held to apply only to UDAP claims involving intentional misrepresentation, Osbourne v. Capital City Mortg. Corp., 727 A.2d 322, 325 (D.C. 999) stands as an impediment to consumers. compensatory damages No, D.C. Code (k)()(A). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, D.C. Code (k)()(B). Precludes class actions (2) No, (k)(), (k)()(e). No multiple damages () No, D.C. Code (k)()(A). Awarded 9 A lorida State Potential No, la. Stat. Ann No, la. Stat. Ann broadly prohibits both unfair and unconscionable acts. No, la. Stat. Ann However, the state agency has repealed almost all of its rules. No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, la. Stat. Ann relief No, la. Stat. Ann. 5.27()(b). No, la. Stat. Ann. 5.27()(c). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, la. Stat. Ann Penalty less than $, or more than Yes, la. Stat. Ann ($, per violation if willful).

12 Awarded 8 B Yes, la. Stat. Ann (AG is to refer violators to whatever state agency supervises them). lorida Excludes credit transactions 3 Excludes insurance transactions () industries Excludes real estate transactions () No, la. Stat. Ann No, la. Stat. Ann broadly prohibits both unfair and unconscionable acts. No, la. Stat. Ann , 5.279, 5.92, 5.97, to Yes. Many credit transactions are excluded by la. Stat. Ann. 5.22(4). See Bankers Trust Co. v. Basciano, 96 So.2d 773, 779 (la. App. 27) (refusing to apply the state s UDAP proscriptions to a bank). Yes, la. Stat. Ann. 5.22(4). See e.g. International Brokerage & Surplus Lines, Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins, 27 WL 2272 (M.D. la. 27); LaPenna v. Government Employees Ins. Co., 26 WL (M.D. la. 26). la. Stat. Ann. 5.23(8) defines trade or commerce to include real property. However, la. Stat. 5.22(6) immunizes licensees from liability for most acts involving sale, lease, rental, or appraisal of real estate, so many aspects of real property transactions are not covered. Excludes post-sale acts () Yes. Decisions are mixed. While See Schauer v. General Motors Acceptance Corp., 89 So.2d 89, 82 (la. App. 22) holds that the statute covers abusive debt collection, cases such as City of Cars, Inc. v. Simms, 526 So.2d 9 (la. App 988), holding that repossssion is not covered, stand as an impediment to consumers. Requires reliance (2) compensatory damages No, la. Stat. Ann. 5.2(2). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) 2 Yes, la. Stat. Ann No. Davis v. Powertel, Inc., 776 So.2d 97 (la. App. 2) (reliance not required). A number of other decisions distinguish or question Davis, but it is the decision most on point. Precludes class actions (2) No. See, e.g., Latman v. Costa Cruise Lines, N.V. 758 So.2d 699 (la. App. 2) No multiple damages () Yes. Awarded Georgia

13 State Potential No, Ga. Code --393(a). No, Ga. Code --393(a). No, Ga. Code No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Ga. Code relief No, Ga. Code --397(a)(2)(A). No, Ga. Code --397(a)(2)(C). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Ga. Code --397(a)(2)(B). Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes, Ga. Code --397(a)(2)(B) ($5 per violation). No. 8 B Georgia No, Ga. Code --393(a). No, No, Ga. Code --393(a). No, Ga. Code --393(b), and state has adopted several regulations under Ga. Code Excludes credit transactions 3 Yes. Decisions are in conflict on extent of exclusion created by Ga. Code --396(). Decisions such as In re Taylor, 292 B.R. 434 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. 22), stand as an impediment to consumers. Excludes insurance transactions () Yes, erguson v. United Ins. Co., 293 S.E.2d 736 (Ga. App. 982). industries Excludes real estate transactions () Excludes post-sale acts () Requires reliance (2) No, Ga. Code (defining consumer transaction to include real estate), --392(9) (defining trade or commerce to include real estate).. No. See, e.g., Garner v. Academy Collection Service, Inc., 25 WL (N.D. Ga. 25). See, e.g., Pryor v. CCEC, Inc., 57 S.E.2d 454 (Ga. App. 22). Yes, Zeeman v. Black, 56 Ga.App. 82, 273 S.E.2d 9 (Ga.App. 98). See also Tiismann v. Linda Martin Homes Corp., 637 S.E.2d 4 (Ga. 26) (citing Zeeman with favor). Georgia courts have not addressed this question. Yes, Ga. Code --399(b).

14 compensatory damages No, Ga. Code --399(a). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Ga. Code --399(d). Precludes class actions (2) 2 Yes, Ga. Code --399(a). No multiple damages () No, No, Ga. Code --399(c). Awarded Hawaii State Potential No, Haw. Rev. Stat. 48-2(A). No, Haw. Rev. Stat. 48-2(A). No, Haw. Rev. Stat (5). No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Haw. Rev. Stat. 48-8, relief No, Haw. Rev. Stat No, Haw. Rev. Stat (a). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Haw. Rev. Stat Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded No, Haw. Rev. Stat ($5 to $, per violation). Yes. 9 A Hawaii Excludes credit transactions Excludes insurance transactions () industries Excludes real estate transactions () Excludes post-sale acts () No, Haw. Rev. Stat. 48-2(A). No, Haw. Rev. Stat. 48-2(A). No, state has adopted several regulations. No, Hawaii Community ederal Credit Union v. Keka, P.3d (Hawai i 2), No, Jenkins v. Commonwealth Land Title Ins. Co., 95.3d 79 (9th Cir. 996). No, Hawaii Community ederal Credit Union v. Keka, P.3d, 6 (Hawai i 2). No. See, e.g., Ai v. rank Huff Agency, Ltd., 67 P.2d 34 (Hawaii 98). No, Haw. Rev. Stat. 48-2(c).

15 Requires reliance (2) No, Courbat v. Dahana Ranch, Inc., 4 P.3d 427, 435 (Hawai i, 26) (test is objective, turning on whether act is likely to mislead consumers). compensatory damages No, Haw. Rev. Stat. 48-3(a)(), (b)(). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Haw. Rev. Stat. 48-3(a)(), (b)(). Precludes class actions (2) No, Haw. Rev. Stat. 48-3(c). No multiple damages () No, Haw. Rev. Stat. 48-3(a)(), (b)(). Awarded A State Potential No, Idaho Code 48-63(7). No, Idaho Code 48-63(8), 48-63C (broadly prohibiting unconscionable acts). No, Idaho Code 48-64(2). No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Idaho Code 48-6, relief No, Idaho Code 48-66()(b). No, Idaho Code 48-66()(c), 48-67(2). Idaho No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Idaho Code 48-66()(e). Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes, Idaho Code 48-66()(e) (up to $5 per violation). No, Idaho Code 48-67(5). 9 A No, No, Idaho Code 48-63(7). No, Idaho Code 48-63(8), 48-63C (broadly prohibiting unconscionable acts). No, Idaho Code 48-63()-(9). In addition, Idaho has adopted a number of rules. Excludes credit transactions 3 Yes, Idaho irst Nat. Bank v. Wells, 596 P.2d 429 (Idaho 979). Excludes insurance transactions () industries Idaho Yes, Idaho Code See Irwin Rogers Agency, Inc. v. Murphy, 833 P.2d 28 (Idaho 992).

16 Excludes real estate transactions () No, Idaho Code 48-62(6) (defining goods to include real property). Excludes post-sale acts () No, In re Western Acceptance Corp., 788 P.2d 24 (Idaho 99). Requires reliance (2) No, courts have not yet ruled. No, courts have not yet ruled. compensatory damages No, Idaho Code 48-68(), Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Idaho Code 48-68(4). Precludes class actions (2) No, Idaho Code 48-68(). No multiple damages () Awarded 6 D Illinois State Potential No, 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/2. No, 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/2. No, 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/4. No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/3, 55/4. No, 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/7(a). relief No, 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/7(a). No, 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/7(a). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/7(b). Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes, 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/7(b) up to $5,; up to $5, per violation if intent to defraud is shown. No, 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/7(a). 9 A Illinois No, 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/2. No, 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/2. No, 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/2A to 55/2XX.

17 Excludes credit transactions No. See, e.g., Heastie v. Community Bank, 69. Supp. 76 (N.D. Ill. 988); Chandler v. Am. Gen. in., Inc., 768 N.E.2d 6 (Ill. App. 22).. However, is patchy due to decisions such as Najieb v. William Chrysler-Plymouth, 22 WL (N.D. Ill. 22).and Zekman v. Direct American Marketers, Inc., 659 N.E.2d 853 (Ill. 998). Excludes insurance transactions () industries No. See 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/2QQ (imposing specific restrictions on insurance transactions). Excludes real estate transactions () No, 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/(b), (f) (defining merchandise and trade and commerce to include real estate). Excludes post-sale acts () No, People ex rel. Daley v. Datacom Systems Corp.,585 N.E.2d 5 (Ill. 99) (statute covers debt collection). Requires reliance (2) No, Connick v. Suzuki Motor Co., Ltd., 675 N.E.2d 584 (Ill. 996). compensatory damages No, Avery v. State arm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 835 N.E.2d 8, 856 (Ill. 25). No, 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/a(c). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, 85 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 55/a(c), as interpreted by Krautsack v. Anderson, 86 N.E.2d 633, 645 (Ill. 26). Precludes class actions (2) No multiple damages () Yes Awarded 9 A Indiana State Potential 3 Yes. No, Ind. Code No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Ind. Code relief Yes, Ind. Code requires intent or knowledge for most substantive violations. No, Ind. Code (c)(). No, Ind. Code (c)(2). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Ind. Code (g); see also Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes. 2 Yes, Ind. Code (g) ($5 per violation if knowing or intentional, otherwise $5 per violation; see also ($5 per violation for deceptive acts done as part of scheme, artifice, or device with intent to defraud or mislead).

18 Indiana 3 Yes. No, Ind. Code No, Ind. Code Excludes credit transactions No, Ind. Code (a)() (defining consumer transaction as a sale, lease, assignment, award by chance, or other disposition of an item of personal property, real property, a service, or an intangible,... with or without an extension of credit... ), Ind. Code (narrow exemption for acts required or expressly permitted by other law). Excludes insurance transactions () Yes, Ind. Code industries Excludes real estate transactions () Yes, Ind. Code (a). Excludes post-sale acts () Requires reliance (2) Yes, Ind. Code compensatory damages No, Ind. Code (). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) 2 Yes, Ind. Code (a). Precludes class actions (2) No, Ind. Code No multiple damages () No, Ind. Code (). Awarded Yes, Ind. Code and (a)(4)-(7) (with exception for deceptive acts done as part of scheme, artifice, or device with intent to defraud or mislead). Iowa State Potential No, Iowa Code 74.6(2)(a), ()(f). No, Iowa Code 74.6(2)(a), ()(n). No, Iowa Code 74.6(4)(a). No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Iowa Code 74.6(4)(a). No, Iowa Code 74.6(7). relief No, Iowa Code 74.6(7).

19 No, Iowa Code 74.6(7). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Iowa Code 74.6(7). Penalty less than $, or more than No, Iowa Code 74.6(7): $4, per violation. Awarded A No, Iowa Code 74.6(7) (authorizing court to make any orders or judgments necessary to prevent use of practices). Iowa 3 No Law 2 No Law Excludes credit transactions 3 No Law Excludes insurance transactions () No Law industries Excludes real estate transactions () Excludes post-sale acts () Requires reliance (2) compensatory damages Two-way or no attorney fees (2) Precludes class actions (2) No multiple damages () Awarded Kansas State Potential No, Kan. Stat (a). No, Kan. Stat Yes, Kan. Stat only allows procedural rules. No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Kan. Stat

20 relief No, While almost all of the specific prohibitions at 5-626(b) require intent or knowledge, the general prohibition of deceptive acts and practices at Kan. Stat (a) does not. No, Kan. Stat (a)(2). No, Kan. Stat (a), (c)(2). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Kan. Stat Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded No, Kan. Stat up to $, per violation. No, Kan. Stat (c)(5). 8 B Kansas Excludes credit transactions No, Kan. Stat (a). No, Kan. Stat No, Kan. Stat (b). Excludes insurance transactions () Yes, Kan. Stat (c). No, State ex rel. Stephan v. Brotherhood Bank and Trust Co., 649 P.2d 49, 422 (Kan. App. 982). See also Kan. Stat (j) (excluding banks and other regulated lending institutions, but only as to their disposition of repossessed collateral). industries Excludes real estate transactions () No, Kan. Stat (c) and (h). Excludes post-sale acts () No, Kan. Stat (j) (defining supplier to include those who enforce consumer transactions), 5-627(a) (unconscionable act is a violation whether it occurs before, during, or after the transaction). Requires reliance (2) compensatory damages No, Kan. Stat (b)(). See Cole v. Hewlett Packard Co., 26 WL (Kan. App. Mar. 3, 26). No, Ray v. Ponca/Universal Holdings, Inc., 93 P.2d 29, 22 (Kan. App. 995). No, Kan. Stat (b), (c). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Kan. Stat (e). Precludes class actions (2) No, Kan. Stat (c), (d). No multiple damages () Yes. Awarded 8 B Kentucky

21 State Potential No, Ky. Rev. Stat No, Ky. Rev. Stat Yes, Ky. Rev. Stat. 5.8 gives the Attorney General authority to issue regulations which will facilitate performing the duties and exercising the authority vested in the AG, but because of restrictions in Ky. Rev. Stat. 3A.222 this is not considered sufficient for substantive rules without a more specific grant of authority. No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Ky. Rev. Stat relief No, Ky. Rev. Stat No, Ky. Rev. Stat No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Ky. Rev. Stat Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes, Ky. Rev. Stat (up to $2 per violation if willful). No, Ky. Rev. Stat C Kentucky No, Ky. Rev. Stat No, Ky. Rev. Stat Yes. Excludes credit transactions No. See Ky. Rev. Stat (broad definition of trade or commerce ), (specific provisions regarding assignees in consumer credit transactions). See, e.g., Stafford v. Cross Country Bank, 262.Supp.2d 776 (W.D. Ky. 23); Hamilton v. York, 987.Supp. 953 (E.D. Ky. 997). Excludes insurance transactions () No, Stevens v. Motorists Mut. Ins. Co., 759 S.W.2d 89, 82-2 (Ky. 988). industries Excludes real estate transactions () Yes. See Craig v. Keene, 32 S.W.3d 9 (Ky. App. 2) (greatly limiting scope of any of real estate transactions by excluding single real estate transactions. Excludes post-sale acts () No. See, e.g., Hamilton v. York, 987. Supp 953, 958 (E.D. Ky. 997) (applying UDAP statute to debt collection). Requires reliance (2) (Kentucky courts have not addressed this question).

22 compensatory damages No, Ky. Rev. Stat (). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) 2 Yes, Ky. Rev. Stat Precludes class actions (2) No multiple damages () Yes. Awarded 5 Louisiana State Potential No, La. Stat. Ann. 5:45(A). No, La. Stat. Ann. 5:45(A) (unfair acts or practices). No, La. Stat. Ann. 5:45(B). No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, La. Stat. Ann. 5:4. relief No, La. Stat. Ann. 5:47(A). No, La. Stat. Ann. 5:48(A). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, La. Stat. Ann. 5:47(B). Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes, La. Stat. Ann. 5:47(B) (up to $5 per violation if the act is done with intent to defraud). No, La. Stat. Ann. 5:48(A)(),, (4). 9 A Excludes credit transactions 3 Louisiana No, La. Stat. Ann. 5:45(A), No, La. Stat. Ann. 5:45(A) (unfair acts or practices). No, the state has adopted a number of regulations. Excludes insurance transactions () Yes, La. Stat. Ann. 5:46(). Yes, La. Stat. Ann. 5:46() (broad exemption for most activities by most creditors). industries Excludes real estate transactions () No, La. Stat. Ann. 5:42 (broadly defining trade or commerce so that it covers real estate transactions).

23 Excludes post-sale acts () No, See Slayton v. Davis, 9 So.2d 246 (La. App. 25); Pelican Point Operations, L.L.C. v. Carroll Childers Co., 87 So.2d 7 (La. App. 22); Bryant v. Sears Consumer inancial Corp., 67 So.2d 9 (La. App. 993). Requires reliance (2) No, Louisiana courts have not reached this question. No, there have been no definitive rulings, and cases such as Roustabouts, Inc. v. Hamer, 447 So.2d 543 (La. App. 984) have applied the preponderance of the evidence standard. compensatory damages No, La. Stat. Ann. 5:49(A). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, La. Stat. Ann. 5:49(A). Precludes class actions (2) 2 Yes, La. Stat. Ann. 5:49. No multiple damages () No, La. Stat. Ann. 5:49(A). Awarded 4 Maine State Potential No, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit No, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit No, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 5 27(2). No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit relief No, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit Yes, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit allows the Attorney General to seek restitution only if the defendant has violated an injunction. No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes. 6 D Yes, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit (up to $, per violation if willful). Maine No, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit No, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit No, state has adopted several regulations.

24 Excludes credit transactions Excludes insurance transactions () industries No, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit (broadly defining trade and commerce ), 28 (narrow exemption for specific activities authorized by federal or state agency). No, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit (broadly defining trade and commerce ), 28 (narrow exemption for specific activities authorized by federal or state agency). Excludes real estate transactions () Excludes post-sale acts () No, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit (defining trade or commerce to include real property), 23() (private cause of action). No high court rulings; see Newcombe v. Mooers, 2 WL (Me. Super. 2) (improper repossession is UDAP violation). Requires reliance (2) No. See.State v. Weinschenk, 868 A.2d 2, 26 (Me. 25); Tungate v. MacLean-Stevens Studios, 74 A. 2d 792, 797 (Me. 998). The issue has not been completely resolved, however. Yes, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 5 23(-A). compensatory damages No, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 5 23(). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 5 23(2). Precludes class actions (2) No. See Oceanside at Pine Point Condominium Owners Ass'n v. Peachtree Doors, Inc. 659 A.2d 267 (Me. 995). No multiple damages () Yes. Awarded 8 B State Potential No, Md. Code Comm. Law 3-3(),, No, Md. Code Comm. Law No, Md. Code Comm. Law 3-2(2), No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Md. Code Comm. Law relief Maryland No, Md. Code Comm. Law No, Md. Code Comm. Law No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Md. Code Comm. Law 3-4(a), (b). Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded 8 B Yes, Md. Code Comm. Law 3-4(a), (b) up to $ per violation; $5 per violation for repeat offenders. No. Md. Code Comm. Law 3-24(5) allows license revocation, but requires participation or approval of licensing agency, and also only if defendant refuses to cease and desist.

25 Maryland No, Md. Code Comm. Law 3-3(), ; No, Md. Code Comm. Law No, Md. Code Comm. Law 3-3; State has also adopted several regulations under Md. Code Comm. Law 3-2(2), Excludes credit transactions No, Md. Code Comm. Law 3-(c)() (defining consumer to include a recipient of consumer credit). Excludes insurance transactions () Yes, Md. Code Comm. Law 3-4(). industries Excludes real estate transactions () No, Md. Code Comm. Law 3-(c)() (defining consumer to include a purchaser, lessee, or recipient of consumer realty), 3-33(), (2) Excludes post-sale acts () No, Md. Code Comm. Law 3-3(4)(iii), 3-33(4). Requires reliance (2) Yes. Although the issue has not been resolved by Maryland s highest court, decisions such as State v. Andrews, 533 A.2d 282 (Md. Spec. App. 987) and Hoffman v. Stamper, 843 A.2d 53, 9 (Md. Civ. App. 24), aff d in part, rev d in part on other grounds, 867 A.2d 276 (Md. 25), impose impediments to consumers. compensatory damages No, Devine Seafood, Inc. v. Attorney General of Maryland, 377 A.2d 94 (Md. Spec. App. 977). No, Md. Code Comm. Law Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Md. Code Comm. Law 3-48(b). Precludes class actions (2) See, e.g., Green v. H & R Block, Inc., 735 A.2d 39 (Md. 999). No multiple damages () Yes. Awarded 7 C Massachusetts State Potential No, Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 93A, 2(a). No, Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 93A, 2(a). No, Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 93A, 2(c). No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 93A, 6. relief No, Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 93A, 4.

26 No, Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 93A, 4. No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 93A, 4. Penalty less than $, or more than Yes, Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 93A, 4 ($5 per violation if defendant knew or should have known that practice was a violation). Awarded No, Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 93A, 8. 9 A Massachusetts No, Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 93A, 2(a). No, Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 93A, 2(a). No, state has adopted a number of specific regulations. Excludes credit transactions No. See, e.g., Gossels v. leet Nat. Bank, 27 WL (Mass. App. 27); Mass. Regs. Code tit. 94, 3.7, 8. to 8.8. Excludes insurance transactions () industries No. Hopkins v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 75 N.E.2d 943, (Mass. 2). Excludes real estate transactions () No, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, (b). Excludes post-sale acts () No, Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 93A, 2(a) (broad definition of trade and commerce ); Mass. Regs. Code tit. 94, 7. to 7. (debt collection regulation). Requires reliance (2) No, Heller in. v. INA, 573 N.E.2d 8 (Mass. 99); International idelity Ins. Co. v. Wilson, 443 N.E. 2d 38 (Mass. 983); Slaney v. Westwood Auto, Inc., 322 N.E.2d 768 (Mass. 975). See also Aspinall v. Philip Morris Cos., 83 N.E.2d 476, 486 (Mass. 24). No, Zimbovsky v. Tokar, 25 Mass.App.Div., 25 WL (Mass. App. 25); Blanchflower Realty Trust, Inc. v. Goodhue, 26 WL (Mass. Super. 26); CBI Consulting, Inc. v. Cubellis & Associates, Inc., 25 WL (Mass. Super. 25). Yes, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, 9. compensatory damages No, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, 9(). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, 9(4). Precludes class actions (2) No, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A, 9(2). No multiple damages () No, Mass. Gen. Laws 9. Awarded 9 A Michigan

27 State Potential No, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann ()(s), (bb), (cc). No, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann ()(x), (z).. No, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann (2). No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann ; Mich. Admin. Code R relief No, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann No, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann (2). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann (). Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes. 8 B Yes, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann () up to $25, per violation if knowing and persistent. Michigan No, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann ()(s), (bb), (cc). No, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann ()(x), (z).. No, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann Excludes credit transactions 3 Yes. See Cowles v. Bank West, 687 N.W.2d 63, 67 (Mich. App. 24), aff d in part, rev d in part on other grounds, 79 N.W.2d 94 (Mich. 26). Excludes insurance transactions () Yes, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann (()(a),. industries Excludes real estate transactions () Excludes post-sale acts () Requires reliance (2) 3 Yes, Liss v. Lewiston-Richards, Inc., 732 N.W.2d 54 (Mich. 27). Yes. Michigan courts have not addressed this issue directly, but Liss v. Lewiston-Richards, Inc., 732 N.W.2d 54 (Mich. 27) stands as an impediment to claims against real estate brokers or any other licensed party. Yes. Michigan courts have not addressed this issue directly, but Liss v. Lewiston-Richards, Inc., 732 N.W.2d 54 (Mich. 27) stands as an impediment to claims against licensed debt collectors or any other licensed party. No,, Dix. v. Am. Bankers Life Assurance Co., 5 N.W.2d 26 (Mich. 987); Evans v. Ameriquest Mortg. Co., 23 WL 73469, at *3 (Mich.App. 23). See Regnier v. Payter, 23 WL (Mich.App. 23).

28 compensatory damages No, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann (2). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann (2). Precludes class actions (2) No, Mich. Comp. Laws Ann No multiple damages () Yes. Awarded Minnesota State Potential No, Minn. Stat (). No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Minn. Stat. 8.3(2). relief No, Minn. Stat. 8.3, No, Minn. Stat. 8.3(3a) (AG may obtain the remedies an individual may obtain, which include damages); 8.3(2c) (referring to sums recovered for the benefit of injured persons); State by Humphrey v. Alpine Air Products, Inc., 5 N.W.2d 888, 896 n. 4 (Minn. 993) (allowing recovery of restitution under parens patriae doctrine). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Minn. Stat up to $25,. Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded No, Minn. Stat up to $25,. No. 5 Minnesota Excludes credit transactions No, Minn. Stat (). No, Minn. Stat (2)-(6), to No, Minn. Stat (2) (defining merchandise to include loans), (specific prohibition regarding mortgage loan closings).

29 Excludes insurance transactions () industries Excludes real estate transactions () Excludes post-sale acts () No, Minn. Stat (2) (broad definition of merchandise ). See, e.g, Mitchell v. Chicago Title Ins. Co. 24 WL 23785, 2 (Minn.Dist.Ct. 24) No, Minn. Stat (2) (defining merchandise to include real estate). Yes. Law is unsettled, and decisions such as Thinesen v. JBC Legal Group, P.C., 25 WL (D. Minn. 25) and Maneval v. Jon R. Hawks, Ltd., 999 WL (D. Minn. 999) create an impediment to consumers. 2 Yes, Ly v. Nystrom, 65 N.W.2d 32 (Minn. 2). Requires reliance (2) No, issue is not fully settled in Minnesota, but view that reliance is not required is supported by Wiegand v. Walser Automotive Groups, Inc., 683 N.W.2d 87, 8 (Minn. 24) and Group Health Plan, Inc. v. Philip Morris Inc., 62 N.W.2d 2 (Minn. 2), ("[a]llegations of reliance are not necessary to state a claim under section 8.3, subdivision 3a, for damages resulting from a violation"). compensatory damages No, State by Humphrey v. Alpine Air Products, Inc., 5 N.W.2d 788 (Minn. 993). No, Minn. Stat. 8.3(3a). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Minn. Stat. 8.3(3a). Precludes class actions (2) No multiple damages () Yes. Awarded 4 Mississippi State Potential No, Miss. Code (). No, Miss. Code (). No, Miss. Code ()(f). No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Miss. Code ()(a). relief No, Miss. Code No, Miss. Code No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Miss. Code ()(b) Penalty less than $, or more than Yes, Miss. Code ()(b) ($, per violation, but only if a knowing and willful violation is established by clear and convincing evidence). No, Miss. Code

30 Awarded 9 A Mississippi 3 2 Yes, Miss. Code () broadly prohibits deceptive practices, but only allows AG enforcement of this prohibition. Yes, Miss. Code () broadly prohibits unfair practices, but only allows AG enforcement of this prohibition. No, Miss. Code In addition, Mississippi has adopted several regulations under Miss. Code ()(f). Excludes credit transactions (Mississippi courts have not yet ruled on this question). Excludes insurance transactions () Yes, Taylor v. Southern arm Bureau Cas. Co., 954 So.2d 45 (Miss. App. 27), industries Excludes real estate transactions () (Mississippi courts have not yet ruled on this question). Excludes post-sale acts () (Mississippi courts have not yet ruled on this question). Requires reliance (2) No, there are no decisions requiring reliance. No, there are no decisions requiring clear and convincing evidence. Yes, Miss. Code (2) (requiring pre-suit participation in AGapproved dispute settlement program). compensatory damages No, Miss. Code (). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) 2 Yes, Miss. Code (4). Precludes class actions (2) 2 Yes, Mississippi has no class action rule or statute and Mississippi state courts do not recognize class actions. No multiple damages () Yes. Awarded -2 Missouri State Potential No, Mo. Rev. Stat. 47.2(). No, Mo. Rev. Stat. 47.2(). No, Mo. Rev. Stat No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Mo. Rev. Stat relief No, Mo. Rev. Stat. 47.(). No, Mo. Rev. Stat. 47.(4).

31 No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Mo. Rev. Stat. 47.(6). Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes, Mo. Rev. Stat. 47.(6) - up to $ per violation. Yes. 8 B Missouri No, Mo. Rev. Stat. 47.2(). No, Mo. Rev. Stat. 47.2(). No, Mo. Rev. Stat to and include a few specific prohibitions, and the state has adopted a number of regulations under Mo. Rev. Stat Excludes credit transactions No. State courts have not yet resolved this question, but see Mo. Rev. Stat. 47.(2), (4) (broad definitions of trade or commerce and merchandise ), Mo. Rev. Stat. 47.2(2)(2) (excluding small subset of creditors, and then only if Attorney General or consumers are not authorized to bring suit); Mo. Rev. Stat (authorizing consumers to bring suit); ielder v. Credit Acceptance Corp., 9.Supp.2d 966 (W.D.Mo. 998), rev d on other grounds ielder v. Credit Acceptance Corp. 88.3d 3 (8th Cir. 999). Excludes insurance transactions () No. State courts have not yet resolved this question, but see Mo. Rev. Stat. 47.(2), (4) (broad definitions of trade or commerce and merchandise ), Mo. Rev. Stat. 47.2(2)(2) (excluding insurers, but then only if Attorney General or consumers are not authorized to bring suit); Mo. Rev. Stat (authorizing consumers to bring suit); industries Excludes real estate transactions () No, Mo. Rev. Stat. 47.(4). Excludes post-sale acts () Yes. The issue has not been decided by state courts, but Williams v. Regency inancial Corp., 39.3d 45, 5 (8th Cir. 22), although it failed to acknowledge language in the statute that an unfair or deceptive practice is a violation whether committed before, during or after the sale, stands as an impediment to consumers. Requires reliance (2) No, Hess v. Chase Manhattan Bank, USA, N.A., 22 S.W.3d 758 (Mo. 27). No. State courts have not yet ruled on this question, but see See ielder v. Credit Acceptance Corp., 9.Supp.2d 966 (W.D. Mo. 998), rev d on other grounds, ielder v. Credit Acceptance Corp., 88.3d 3 (8th Cir. 999). compensatory damages No, Mo. Rev. Stat ().

32 Two-way or no attorney fees (2) 2 Yes, Mo. Rev. Stat (). Precludes class actions (2) No, Mo. Rev. Stat (2). No multiple damages () Yes. Awarded 6 D Montana State Potential No, Mont. Code No, Mont. Code No, Mont. Code 3-4-4(2). No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Mont. Code relief No, Mont. Code 3-4-() requires a showing of knowledge only if the state seeks an injunction against a defendant who is about to use, but has not yet used, an unlawful practice. No, Mont. Code 3-4-(). No, Mont. Code 3-4-3(). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Mont. Code (2). Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes, Mont. Code (2) up to $, per violation if willful. No, Mont. Code 3-4-3(). 9 A Montana No, Mont. Code No, Mont. Code No, state has adopted several rules under Mont. Code 3-4-4(2). Excludes credit transactions No, Baird v. Norwest Bank, 843 P.2d 327 (Mont. 992) (UDAP stattute applies to consumer loans by banks in the lending and collecting of such loans ). Excludes insurance transactions () No, Britton v. armers Ins. Group (Truck Ins. Exchange), 72 P.2d 33, 323 (Mont. 986). industries Excludes real estate transactions () No, Mont. Code 3-4-2() and (8). Excludes post-sale acts () No, Baird v. Norwest Bank, 843 P.2d 327 (Mont. 992). Requires reliance (2) Montana courts have not addressed this question.

33 compensatory damages Montana courts have not addressed this question. No, Mont. Code (). Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Tripp v. Jeld-Wen, Iinc. 2 P.3d 8, (Mont. 25). Precludes class actions (2) 2 Yes, Mont. Code (). No multiple damages () No, Mont. Code () Awarded 8 B Nebraska State Potential No, Neb. Rev. Stat No, Neb. Rev. Stat No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Neb. Rev. Stat relief No, Neb. Rev. Stat (). No, Neb. Rev. Stat (2). No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Neb. Rev. Stat Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes, Neb. Rev. Stat (up to $2 per violation) No, Neb. Rev. Stat C Nebraska No, Neb. Rev. Stat No, Neb. Rev. Stat Yes. Excludes credit transactions 3 Yes, Neb. Rev. Stat () excludes many credit transactions. Excludes insurance transactions () No, Neb. Rev. Stat (2). industries Excludes real estate transactions () No, Neb. Rev. Stat. 59-6(2),.

34 Excludes post-sale acts () Requires reliance (2) compensatory damages 2 No, Hage v. General Service Bureau, 36.Supp.2d 883 (D.Neb. 23). Yes, Nelson v. Lusterstone Surfacing Co., 65 N.W.2d 36 (Neb. 2). No, statute is silent and courts to date have not imposed a reliance requirement. No, statute is silent and courts to date have not imposed anything beyond the usual standard of proof. No, Neb. Rev. Stat Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Neb. Rev. Stat Precludes class actions (2) No multiple damages () Yes. Awarded 3 Nevada State Potential No, Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann (5); (2), No, Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann () No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann (4) relief Yes, almost all of the prohibitions require that the act be knowing or intentional. No, Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann , No, Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann (2)(c), (4), () No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann (2) Penalty less than $, or more than Awarded Yes, Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann (2) - up to $5 per violation if willful No, Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann (5) 6 D Nevada No, Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann (5); (2), No, specific prohibitions are found in Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann to and in regulations adopted under Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann ()

35 Excludes credit transactions No, Nev. Rev. Stat (prohibiting deceptive trade practices in the course of the defendant s business or occupation ); (a) (excluding conduct in compliance with the orders or rules of, or a statute administered by, a federal, state, or local governmental agency ; focus on conduct makes it unlikely to be interpreted as blanket exemption for credit transactions). Excludes insurance transactions () No, Nev. Rev. Stat (prohibiting deceptive trade practices in the course of the defendant s business or occupation ); (a) (excluding conduct in compliance with the orders or rules of, or a statute administered by, a federal, state, or local governmental agency ; focus on conduct makes it unlikely to be interpreted as blanket exemption for insurance transactions). industries Excludes real estate transactions () Excludes post-sale acts () No, Nev. Rev. Stat (prohibiting deceptive trade practices in the course of the defendant s business or occupation ). No, Nev. Rev. Stat (prohibiting deceptive trade practices in the course of the defendant s business or occupation ). Requires reliance (2) Not yet addressed by Nevada courts. Not yet addressed by Nevada courts. compensatory damages No, Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. 4.6(a) Two-way or no attorney fees (2) No, Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann. 4.6(b) Precludes class actions (2) No multiple damages () Yes. Awarded 7 C State Potential No, N.H. Rev. Stat. 358-A:2. No, N.H. Rev. Stat. 358-A:2. No presuit investigatory powers (2) No, N.H. Rev. Stat. 358-A:8. relief New Hampshire No, N.H. Rev. Stat. 358-A:4(III)(a). No, N.H. Rev. Stat. 358-A:4(III)(a), No civil penalty for initial violations (2) No, N.H. Rev. Stat. 358-A:4(III)(b).