District of Columbia
| Pages | 115-130 |
115
CHAPTER 10
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
A. Scope of the Statute and Elements of a Cause of Action
The District of Columbia Consumer Protection Procedures Act
(CPPA)1 is a comprehensive consumer protection statute, enacted to
“(1) assure that a just mechanism exists to remedy all improper trade
practices and deter the continuing use of such practices; (2) promote,
through effective enforcement, fair business practices throughout the
community; and (3) educate consumers to demand high standards and seek
proper redress of grievances.”2
1. Unfair or Deceptive Trade Practices
The CPPA prohibits forty -three specific categories of unfair or
deceptive trade practices, unconscionable terms in sales and leases, and
violations of specific statutory provisions in the D.C. Code.3 The list of
unfair or deceptive trade practices, however, is not exclusive.4 A “trade
practice” is broadly defined as “any act which does or would create, alter,
repair, furnish, make available, provide information about, or, directly or
indirectly, solicit or offer for or effectuate, a sale, lease or transfer, of
consumer goods or services.”5
Many of the “unfair or deceptive” practices set out in the CPPA are
specific misrepresentations and false statements concerning the qualities
of goods and services (e.g., misrepresenting a source, sponsorship,
approval, certification, accessories, characteristics, ingredients, uses,
1. D.C. CODE §§ 28-3901 through 28-3911.
2. Id. § 28-3901(b).
3. Id. § 28-3904.
v. D.C. Dep’t of Consumer & Regul. Affs., 566 A.2d 4 62, 466 (D.C.
1989)).
5. D.C. CODE § 28-3901(a)(6); see also Baylor v. Mitchell Rubenstein
Assocs., P.C., 857 F.3d 939, 947–48 (D.C. Cir. 2017) (noting that the
CPPA “embraces both an expansive understanding of the conduct which
constitutes a ‘trade practice’ . . . and provides an extensive list of [unfair or
deceptive] trade practices”).
116 State Consumer Protection Law
benefits, or qualities;6 misrepresenting used items as new;7
misrepresenting the standard, quality, grade, style, or model;8
misrepresenting the good, services, or business of another;9 falsely stating
that a service, repair, or replacement is needed;10 or falsely stating that
such have been made;11 and misrepresenting the geographic origin of a
good or service).12
In addition to those specific prohibited acts, the CPPA also has
catchall provisions generally prohibiting misrepresentations,13
omissions,14 and innuendo or ambiguity15 as to a material fact. A fact is
material if: (1) a reasonable person would attach importance to it in
determining their choice of action in the transaction in question; or (2) the
maker of the representation knows or has reason to know that its recipient
regards or is likely to regard the matter as important in determining his or
her choice of action, although a reasonable person would not so regard it.16
D.C. law recognizes that “[a]lthough a reasonable consumer generally
would not deem an accurate statement to be misleading, in certain
circumstances it can be.”17 In applying this principle, D.C. courts have
held that CPPA claims may be based on statements that are true but that a
reasonable consumer would find misleading.18
Unlike the common law, the CPPA “does not require a plaintiff to
plead and to prove a duty to disclose information” to state a case based on
6. D.C. CODE § 28-3904(a).
7. Id. § 28-3904(c).
8. Id. § 28-3904(d).
9. Id. § 28-3904(g).
10. Id. § 28-3904(k).
11. Id. § 28-3904(p).
12. Id. § 28-3904(t).
13. Id. § 28-3904(e).
14. Id. § 28-3904(f).
15. Id. § 28-3904(f-1).
omitted).
18. See Beyond Pesticides v. Monsanto Co., 311 F. Supp. 3d 8 2, 90 (D.D.C.
2018) (even if advertising claim that Roundup pesticide targets “an enzyme
found in plants but not in people or pets” could be construed as literally
true to the extent the subject enzyme appears in “gut bacteria” found in
humans, complaint plausibly alleged a violation of CPPA based on
allegation that the claim was misleading); Nat. Consumers League v.
Bimbo Bakeries USA, 2015 WL 1504745, at *11 (D.C. Super. Ct. 2015).
To continue reading
Request your trial