Issue: Whether Laches Apply and Whether There Was a Misrepresentation of Material Fact Under the Consumer Fraud Act (CFA).
| Area of Law: | Litigation & Procedure |
| Keywords: | Laches; Misrepresentation of material fact; Consumer Fraud Act |
| Jurisdiction: | Federal |
| Cited Cases: | 288 N.J. Super. 504 |
| Cited Statutes: | N.J.S.A. 56:8-2 |
| Date: | 06/01/2001 |
Laches applies only when there is an unexplained and inexcusable delay in enforcing a known right, and where there has been prejudice to the other party as a result. See Flammia v. Maller, 66 N.J. Super. 440, 454 (App. Div. 1961).
The question under the CFA is whether the seller made a misrepresentation of fact that was material to the transaction, and which was made to induce the buyer to make the purchase. See Gennari v. Weichert Co. Realtors, 288 N.J. Super. 504, 535 (App. Div. 1996), aff’d, 148 N.J. 582 (1997). Proof of knowledge or negligence are not elements of a consumer fraud claim. See N.J.S.A. 56:8-2; Strawn v. Canuso, 140 N.J. at 59-60 (1995). The CFA applies to transactions between businesses for consumer goods. Dreier Co. v. Unitronix Corp., 218 N.J. Super. 260, 272-73 (App. Div. 1986); Hundred East Credit Corp. v. Eric Schuster Corp., 212 N.J. Super 350, 355 (App. Div. 1986).
[…]