Alleged false advertising of consumer products is one of the most active areas in class action litigation. As most of these matters conclude before the courts can offer an opinion on damages, it is often unclear which damages theories are viable. A recent Ninth Circuit decision, Chowning et al. v. Kohl’s Department Stores Inc. et al. clarifies the issue –available remedies are substantially narrower than those often asserted. In this Law360 article, Timothy Snail discusses the implications of the recent ruling, and uses well-known examples to illustrate common theories of damages.
Click below to read the article.
Keler Marku joins CRA's Antitrust & Competition Practice
“We are pleased to welcome Keler back to CRA,” said Paul Maleh, President and Chief Executive Officer of Charles River Associates. “Keler is an expert in...