Opinion ID: 2974894
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Tennessee Consumers’ Protection Act.

Text: The district court correctly noted that to establish a claim pursuant to the Tennessee Consumers’ Protection Act (“TCPA”), a plaintiff must prove “(1) that the defendant engaged in an unfair or deceptive act or practice declared unlawful by the TCPA; and (2) that the defendant’s conduct caused an ‘ascertainable loss of money or property, real, personal, or mixed, or any other article, commodity, or thing of value wherever situated . . . .”’ (citing Tucker v. Sierra Builders, 180 S.W.3d 109, 115-16 (Tenn. Ct. App.), app. denied (Tenn. 2005) (quoting TENN. CODE ANN. § 47-18-109(a)(1))). In a well-reasoned discussion, the district court examined plaintiffs’ arguments and concluded that they had not alleged these elements with any specificity, excepting Welshans’ eligibility as a handicapped dependent. With respect to this allegation, the district court concluded that, at worst, these denials amounted to an “erroneous denial” of a claim and, accordingly, did not constitute an act of deception or unfairness (citing Hamer v. Harris, 2002 WL 31469213,  (Tenn. Ct. App. Nov. 6, 2002)). We see no reason to disturb this holding or analysis.