| Y2K Act Does Not Create Exclusive Federal Jurisdiction | |
| Description | Plaintiff sued numerous computer retailers for misleading consumers about likely Y2K problems. Defendants' motion to move the case to federal court under the Y2K Act was denied because the Act did not create an exclusive federal cause of action, so the case could be heard in state court. |
| Topic | Cyberlaw |
| Key Words | Y2K Act |
| C A S E S U M M A R Y | |
| Facts | Johnson sued eight retailer defendants in state court in California for failing to reveal material information to their customers concerning Y2K compliance of their products which was in violation of various statutes concerning fair business practices. Defendants requested to move the case to federal court based on federal question jurisdiction under the Y2K Act, contending that the state court did not have jurisdiction under the federal statute. |
| Decision | Motion denied. "The Y2K Act does create a number of procedural requirements that arguably apply to plaintiff's claims. In actions based on injuries suffered by reason of the actual or potential failure of electronic equipment due to the date transition from 1999 to 2000, the Y2K Act creates ... heightened pleading requirements, and provides for notice and opportunity to cure. What the Y2K Act does not create, however, is a federal cause of action." Congress made it clear that the Y2K Act does not create a new cause of action. Hence, state courts are fully capable of applying the Y2K Act when issues arise under it. |
| Citation | Johnson v. Circuit City Stores, Inc., 71 F.Supp.2d 1026 (N.D. Calif., 1999) |
Back to Cyberlaw Listings