DONATE

Be part of the solution.

Help AARP Foundation win back opportunity for struggling Americans 50 and over.

Charity Rating

AARP Foundation earns high rating for accountability from a leading charity evaluator. Read

Connect with the
Foundation

Email:

foundation@aarp.org


AARP Foundation Litigation:

202-434-2060


Toll-free Nationwide:

888-OUR-AARP

(888-687-2277)

 

Toll-free TTY:

877-434-7598

 

AARP Foundation Tax ID

52-0794300

AARP Foundation Legal Advocacy

Docket: Consumer and Utilities

    

Case Name: McGill v. Citibank

Court: Cal. Supreme Court Docket: S224086

Decided: 4/6/2017

Read Summary, AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF) and Court Decision (PDF)

Case Result: The court held that an arbitration agreement that waives the public's right to injunctive relief is invalid and contrary to public policy.

Case Name: Impression Products v. Lexmark International

Court: U.S. Supreme Ct.  Docket: 15-1189

Filed: 1/23/2017

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF) and Article

Case Issue: Can a business that owns a patent restrict the use or resale of its products, after the product has been sold?

Case Name: PHH Corp. v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB)

Court: U.S. Ct. App. D.C. Cir.  Docket: 15-1177

Decided: 10/11/2016

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Result: The CFPB structure is unconstitutional because a single head of the agency is not removable by the President except "for cause." The "for cause" requirement is therefore struck, such that the President may remove the Director for any reason. All the rules and regulations and decisions of the CFPB are otherwise valid. The interpretation given to RESPA by the Director cannot be applied to PHH until it is notified in advance of the change in interpretation. The statute of limitations for agency enforcement of violations of RESPA is three years.

Case Name: Torres v. SGE Management  (en banc)

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 5th Cir.  Docket: 14-20128

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Decided: 9/30/2016

Case Result: In an en banc decision, the court affirmed the district court class certification decision, holding that it is not necessary to prove first-party reliance to show that an alleged pyramid scheme violates the Racketeer Influenced Corrupt Organization Act thus individual issues cannot predominate to defeat class certification.

Case Name: Residential Utility Consumer Office (RUCO) v. Arizona Corp. Comm'n

Court: Arizona Supreme Court   Docket: CV-15-0281-PR

Decided: 8/8/2016

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF) 

Case Result: The system's improvement benefits mechanism that adds a surcharge to the bills of residential water customers complies with the Arizona Constitution's mandate that the Commission determine the fair value of a utility's property when setting rates to improve the water infrastructure.

Case Name: Cottrell v. Alcon Labs

Court: U.S. Ct. App. 3d Cir.     Docket:  16-2015

Filed: 8/1/2016

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF)

Case Issue:  Do glaucoma patients who use prescription eye drops have standing to sue pharmaceutical manufacturers for allegedly causing them economic injury by using packaging that dispenses eye drops that are too large, such that it overflows their eyes and is unavoidably wasted, in violation of state law that prohibits unfair practices. More specifically, can plaintiffs allege economic injury of paying for medication that is unavoidably wasted because the droppers deliver drops that are too large, such that they overflow the eye, where the manufacturer has discretion to set the price of the medication, state an injury in fact for purpose of Artilce III standing.

Case Name: Sergeants Benevolent Ass'n Health and Welfare Fund v. Sanofi-Aventis

Court: U.S. Supreme Court   Docket: 15-1525

Filed: 7/21/2016

Read AARP's Amicus Brief (PDF) 

Case Issue: Where purchasers allege that a manufacturer misrepresented a drug's safety to prescribing doctors to increase sales, does the presence of the doctor break the causal chain - for the purposes of RICO causation - between the manufacturer's misrepresentation and purchasers' economic injuries?

Topic Alerts

You can get weekly email alerts on the topics below. Just click “Follow.”

Manage Alerts

Processing

Please wait...

progress bar, please wait

Search Legal Advocacy

Find
Legal Cases

Find cases in which AFL has advocated in courts nationwide for the rights of older persons, and filed AARP’s amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) briefs that help courts decide precedent-setting cases. The cases within the drop-down categories below are in alphabetical order for ease of searching.

Strengthening Law and Policy through
Legal Advocacy

Our legal advocacy initiatives  - conducted by AARP Foundation Litigation (AFL) - reflect nearly 20 years of work in federal and state courts across the country. Through our efforts, we support the Foundation’s four impact areas: Tackling Senior Hunger, Paving the Way to Stable Income, assuring the adequacy and availability of Safe and Afffordable Housing and Reconnecting People to Families and Communities, and ensure that those 50 and older have a voice in the laws and policies that affect their daily lives.