Articles Tagged: State Enforcement

 

Judge Approves Settlement Clearing Paramount-Warner Merger to Close

A federal judge’s approval of Paramount’s settlement with a coalition of states removes a major litigation obstacle to the company’s proposed transaction with Warner, clearing the way for one of the largest media deals in recent years to move toward closing.

Continue Reading

N.C. Federal Court Lets States’ Antitrust Case Against RealPage Move Forward

A federal court in North Carolina has declined to dismiss antitrust claims brought by state enforcers against RealPage, allowing a closely watched challenge to rental-pricing software to proceed even after the company reached a settlement with the federal government. The ruling is a notable reminder that federal resolution does not necessarily end parallel state antitrust exposure.

The case centers on allegations that RealPage supplied software used by landlords to coordinate or influence rent-setting in ways that unlawfully inflated apartment prices.

Continue Reading

New Mexico Jury Finds Meta Willfully Lied 26 Times in State Privacy Case

A New Mexico jury has delivered a striking win for state tech enforcement, finding that Meta willfully lied on 26 separate occasions in a case centered on data privacy, hate speech, misinformation, and the company’s post-Cambridge Analytica investigation of third-party app developers. The verdict stands out not just for its breadth, but for the jury’s apparent willingness to treat alleged misstatements across multiple content and privacy issues as part of a larger pattern of deceptive conduct.

For legal observers, the significance goes beyond the headlines.

Continue Reading

FTC, Connecticut Land $4 Million Deceptive-Fee Settlement With Manchester City Nissan

The Federal Trade Commission and the State of Connecticut have announced a $4 million settlement with Manchester City Nissan over alleged deceptive-fee practices, marking another notable enforcement action aimed at dealer pricing transparency. The matter is particularly significant because it underscores continued coordination between federal and state regulators in policing so-called “junk fees” and other allegedly misleading charges in consumer transactions.

According to the FTC, the case focused on allegations that the dealership used deceptive fees in connection with vehicle sales.

Continue Reading