law-DTPA | CONSUMER LAW CASES |
DTPA - DECEPTIVE TRADE PRACTICES ACT - TEXAS VERSION
“The DTPA grants consumers a cause of action for false, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices.”Amstadt
v. U.S. Brass Corp., 919 S.W.2d 644, 649 (Tex.1996); see Tex. Bus. & Com. Code Ann. § 17.50(a) (West
Supp. 2010); see also id. §§ 17.45(5), 17.46(b). The trial court found the Home-Sellers knowingly engaged in
a misleading, deceptive act that the Homebuyers relied on to their detriment and which was a producing
cause of damages to the Homebuyers. The elements of a DTPA claim are: (1) the plaintiff was a consumer;
(2) the defendant either engaged in false, misleading or deceptive acts (i.e., violated a specific laundry-list
provision of the DTPA) or engaged in an unconscionable action or course of action; and (3) the DTPA
laundry-list violation or unconscionable action was a producing cause of the plaintiff's injury. Amstadt, 919 S.
W.2d at 649; see Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dallas, Inc., 907 S.W.2d 472, 478 (Tex.1995). In our review
of a DTPA claim, we must liberally construe and apply the statute to promote the underlying goals of the
statute, which include protecting consumers against false, misleading, and deceptive business practices and
unconscionable actions. See Tex. Bus. & Com. Code Ann. § 17.44(a) (West 2002); Latham v. Castillo, 972 S.
W.2d 66, 68 (Tex.1998).
DTPA CLAIMS IN THE TEXAS SUPREME COURT
Metro Allied Ins. Agency v. Lin, No. 07-1032 (Tex. Dec, 11, 2009)(per curiam)
(DTPA, negligence claim predicated on failure to procure insurance coverage, causation standard)(take-
nothing JNOV against plaintiff reinstated)
METRO ALLIED INSURANCE AGENCY, INC. AND C. MICHAEL MCGLOTHLIN v. SHIHCHE E. LIN,
INDIVIDUALLY AND D/B/A APTUS COMPANY, AND SUNG-PING H. LIN; from Harris County;
1st district (01-05-00196-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 08-31-07)
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 59.1, after granting the petition for review and without
hearing oral argument, the Court reverses the court of appeals' judgment and remands the case to the trial
court.
Per Curiam Opinion [in pdf]
View Electronic Briefs in METRO ALLIED INS. AGENCY, INC. v. LIN
DTPA CASES FROM THE COURTS OF APPEALS IN WHICH REVIEW WAS
DENIED
08‑0784 FOXWORTH-GALBRAITH LUMBER COMPANY v. ROBERT PAVELKA AND DENA PAVELKA; from
McLennan County; 10th district (10-07-00246-CV, ___ SW3d ___, 08‑06‑08)
Robert and Dena Pavelka filed suit against Foxworth-Galbraith Lumber Co. alleging that Foxworth-Galbraith
had supplied them lumber which was infested with powderpost beetles. The Pavelka alleged claims for
breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation, breach of warranty, and DTPA violations.
Also see:
Texas Causes of Action and Defenses | 2011 Texas Supreme Court Opinions | 2011 Tex Sup Ct Per Curiams | Texas
Caselaw Topics Pages | Texas Opinions Homepage |