The legal library gives you easy access to the FTC’s case information and other official legal, policy, and guidance documents.
20261956: Crucible Topco, L.P.; H.I.G. Middle Market LBO Fund III, L.P.
20261957: Acciona, S.A.; VE Holdco, LLC
20261961: KKR Global Infrastructure Investors V (USD) SCSp; Electricite de France S.A.
20261962: Watco Holdings, Inc.; Kinder Morgan, Inc.
20261964: ScanSource, Inc.; MAAC Group, LLC
20261965: Verde Operating Company, LLC; Vitol Holding II S.A.
20261967: Sompo Holdings, Inc.; Service Insurance Holdings, Inc.
20261980: Magnolia Oil & Gas Corporation; WildFire Energy I LLC
20261983: BCP Fund III, LP; Sentinel Capital Partners V, L.P.
20261993: Everus Construction Group, Inc.; Epsilon Omega Holdco Inc.
20261997: Hillman Solutions Corp.; McGrath 2020 Family Trust, dated December 7, 2020
CareFirst of Maryland, Inc, et al. v. Amgen, et al.
Chase Nissan/Manchester City Nissan
The Federal Trade Commission and the State of Connecticut are taking action against auto dealer Manchester City Nissan (MCN), along with its owner and a number of key employees, for systematically deceiving consumers about the price of certified used cars, add-ons, and government fees.
The complaint alleges that the dealership, in addition to deceiving consumers, regularly charges them junk fees for certification, add-on products, and government charges without the consumers’ consent, sometimes costing them thousands of dollars in unwanted and unauthorized charges.
FTC v. Hopper (USA), Inc.
The companies that operate the Hopper travel apps have agreed to pay $35 million and will be prohibited from deceiving consumers about fees to settle the Federal Trade Commission’s allegations that they unfairly charged consumers hidden fees and misrepresented the total prices consumers would pay and the benefits of the companies’ VIP Support and Price Freeze services.
The FTC’s complaint alleges that despite its “no hidden fees” promises, Canadian company Hopper Inc. and its Massachusetts-based subsidiary Hopper (USA) Inc., unfairly charged users without their consent for “Tip” and VIP Support fees that the company claimed were optional yet were hidden and pre-selected for consumers.
Doxo
Doxo will pay $2.1 million to settle FTC allegations that the company and two of its co-founders used misleading search ads to impersonate consumers’ billers and misled consumers about millions of dollars in fees they tacked on to consumers’ bills.