Each week, Crowell & Moring’s State Attorneys General team highlights significant actions that State AGs have taken. See our State Attorneys General page for more insights. Below are the updates from December 11-17:
Multistate
- A coalition of 22 state attorneys general sued Uber, joining the FTC, over alleged by making it extremely difficult for consumers to cancel their Uber One subscriptions and charging them unauthorized fees. The lawsuit seeks restitution for affected consumers, civil penalties, and injunctive relief to prevent deceptive enrollment tactics and unfair cancellation obstacles that resulted in unauthorized fees.
- A coalition of 16 state attorneys general sued the U.S. Department of Transportation for unlawfully suspending two federal grant programs—Charging and Fueling Infrastructure (CFI) and Electric Vehicle Charger Reliability and Accessibility Accelerator—authorized under the Infrastructure Investment & Jobs Act. The lawsuit alleges that halting these programs violates the Constitution, the IIJA, and the Administrative Procedure Act, and seeks injunctive relief directing USDOT to resume funding EV charging infrastructure projects, which would expand access, reduce pollution, and promote clean energy jobs.
- A coalition of seven state attorneys general made an inquiry into the six largest buy now, pay later (BNPL) lenders—including Affirm, Afterpay, Klarna, PayPal, Sezzle, and Zip—requesting comprehensive information about their pricing, fee structures, consumer disclosures, and repayment practices. The investigation aims to assess compliance with state consumer protection laws and evaluate risks posed to consumers, such as unclear terms, undisclosed fees, and potential debt traps. As part of the inquiry, the coalition is seeking details on how BNPL providers assess borrowers’ ability to repay, disclose billing and late fees, and manage disputed charges.
Illinois
- Attorney General Raoul reached a $300,000 settlement under state antitrust statutes with Surestaff LLC, a temporary staffing agency, resolving allegations the company entered into a no-poach agreement with other staffing agencies that limited wages and employment opportunities for temporary workers. The settlement requires Surestaff to compensate impacted employees, implement compliance measures, and cease any conduct that violates antitrust laws, with continued litigation pending against additional defendants.
Michigan
- Attorney General Nessel issued a notice of intended action to Recollections, Inc., a clothing company, after receiving more than 50 consumer complaints alleging violations of the Michigan Consumer Protection Act due to unfilled online orders and unprocessed refunds. The action requests Recollections, Inc. confer with the state to seek an assurance agreement and may expose the company to restitution and civil penalties if violations are confirmed.
New Hampshire
- Attorney General Formella filed a complaint under the state’s Consumer Protection Act against PMC Medical Group, Curam Health, and related entities for allegedly abandoning vulnerable patients and failing to provide timely access to medical records. The Department of Justice is seeking injunctive relief, including appointing a receiver to manage and transfer patient records, and prohibiting the defendants from continuing to operate health care businesses in New Hampshire while the litigation proceeds.
Texas
- Attorney General Paxton filed lawsuits under the Texas Health Care Program Fraud Prevention Act (THFPA) against two North Texas physicians accused of unlawfully administering gender transition drugs to minors and fraudulently billing Texas Medicaid. The actions seek treble damages—three times the amount of improperly paid Medicaid funds—as well as substantial civil penalties for each alleged violation, to recover funds and penalize alleged misconduct involving falsified records and deceptive billing practices.
- Attorney General Paxton sued five television manufacturers—including two based in China—for allegedly violating the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act through the use of Automated Content Recognition technology to unlawfully collect consumer data without consent. The lawsuit seeks injunctive relief, restitution to impacted consumers, and civil penalties to address the unauthorized tracking and sale of personal information obtained from Texans’ televisions.