In a major setback for banks, federal judges in Pennsylvania and New Jersey have refused to dismiss a pair of class action consumer suits against TD Bank over allegedly deceptive practices used to market gift cards. In both decisions, the judges rejected TD Bank's argument that such suits, brought under state consumer protection laws, are pre-empted by the federal National Bank Act. At issue are so-called "dormancy fees" charged by TD Bank that reduce the value of gift cards each month after a period of non-use.
November 19, 2009 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
In a major setback for banks, federal judges in Pennsylvania and New Jersey have refused to dismiss a pair of class action consumer suits against TD Bank over allegedly deceptive practices used to market gift cards.
In both decisions, the judges rejected TD Bank’s argument that such suits, brought under state consumer protection laws, are pre-empted by the federal National Bank Act.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
