Publication
William Mitchell Law Review
Volume
33
Page
163
Year
2006
Abstract
The phrase "consumer protection case" may conjure up a used-car buyer trying to get recompense for a vehicle that turned out to be less than promised, or an elderly homeowner victimized by predatory lending tactics trying to maintain possession of her home. In August 2000, the private right of action to enforce Minnesota consumer protection laws was held to be something entirely different. After the Minnesota Supreme Court's decision in Ly v. Nystrom, 1 a business complaining about a competitor's advertising is more likely to have available a private right of action to enforce these laws than either the frustrated car buyer or the predatory lending victim.
Recommended Citation
Prentiss Cox, Goliath Has the Slingshot: Public Benefit and Private Enforcement of Minnesota Consumer Protection Laws, 33 Wm. Mitchell L. Rev. 163 (2006), available at https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/faculty_articles/278.
