Matches in DBpedia 2016-04 for { ?s ?p "Palmer v. Kleargear.com, no. 13-cv-00175 (D. Utah, filed Dec. 18, 2013), is a 2013 federal lawsuit in which an internet retailer was sued by two of its customers after it billed the customers for $3,500 following a negative review. The retailer, Kleargear.com, specializes in nerd apparel, geek toys, gadgets and office toys; it is owned by Paris-based Descoteaux Boutiques. The plaintiffs charged the company with violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act, defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress. In March 2014, the district court entered a default judgment for the plaintiffs, and in June 2014 awarded damages of $306,750. As of 2015, the Palmers continue to attempt to collect the judgment.The internet retailer's charge to the consumer was based on an anti-disparagement clause of their site's terms and conditions.The case led to a California statute prohibiting the enforcement of such clauses, and the introduction of the Consumer Review Freedom Act of 2015, a proposed bill that, if passed, would enact a similar prohibition at the federal level."@en }
Showing triples 1 to 2 of
2
with 100 triples per page.
- Palmer_v._Kleargear.com abstract "Palmer v. Kleargear.com, no. 13-cv-00175 (D. Utah, filed Dec. 18, 2013), is a 2013 federal lawsuit in which an internet retailer was sued by two of its customers after it billed the customers for $3,500 following a negative review. The retailer, Kleargear.com, specializes in nerd apparel, geek toys, gadgets and office toys; it is owned by Paris-based Descoteaux Boutiques. The plaintiffs charged the company with violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act, defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress. In March 2014, the district court entered a default judgment for the plaintiffs, and in June 2014 awarded damages of $306,750. As of 2015, the Palmers continue to attempt to collect the judgment.The internet retailer's charge to the consumer was based on an anti-disparagement clause of their site's terms and conditions.The case led to a California statute prohibiting the enforcement of such clauses, and the introduction of the Consumer Review Freedom Act of 2015, a proposed bill that, if passed, would enact a similar prohibition at the federal level.".
- Q16158922 abstract "Palmer v. Kleargear.com, no. 13-cv-00175 (D. Utah, filed Dec. 18, 2013), is a 2013 federal lawsuit in which an internet retailer was sued by two of its customers after it billed the customers for $3,500 following a negative review. The retailer, Kleargear.com, specializes in nerd apparel, geek toys, gadgets and office toys; it is owned by Paris-based Descoteaux Boutiques. The plaintiffs charged the company with violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act, defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress. In March 2014, the district court entered a default judgment for the plaintiffs, and in June 2014 awarded damages of $306,750. As of 2015, the Palmers continue to attempt to collect the judgment.The internet retailer's charge to the consumer was based on an anti-disparagement clause of their site's terms and conditions.The case led to a California statute prohibiting the enforcement of such clauses, and the introduction of the Consumer Review Freedom Act of 2015, a proposed bill that, if passed, would enact a similar prohibition at the federal level.".