Abstract
In Crowe v. Tull, the Colorado Supreme Court held that the Colorado Consumer Protection Act ("CCPA") applies to attorneys. Putting consumers of legal services on par with consumers in other industries, the decision opened a new avenue of recovery in attorney-client disputes. This Note explores the ramifications of Crowe for attorneys and their clients. Specifically, the Note analyzes the elements of a CCPA claim and their interpretation by the courts and argues that in most cases, a client will not be able to successfully pursue a CCPA claim against his or her attorney. Particularly, a client will have difficulty proving a deceptive trade practice, the public impact of that trade practice, and the causal connection between the deceptive trade practice and the alleged injury. However, where available, a CCPA suit will be more advantageous for the client than claims under other theories available in attorney-client disputes. In light of the difficulties clients will face pursuing CCPA claims, the statute's effectiveness in deterring attorneys from engaging in deceptive trade practices will depend on the judicial interpretation of CCPA claim elements in the attorney-client setting
Recommended Citation
Daniela Ronchetti,
Opening the Door: Crowe v. Tull and the Application of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act to Attorneys,
79
U. Colo. L. Rev.
295
(2008).
Available at:
https://scholar.law.colorado.edu/lawreview/vol79/iss1/7