## Facts

- The New Jersey Attorney General, through the Division of Consumer Affairs, adopted regulations governing the sale of pet cats and dogs under the Consumer Fraud Act (N.J.S.A. 56:8-1 to -20).
- The regulations imposed consumer-protective requirements and provided purchaser remedies for dogs and cats, including refund/repair/replacement options more generous than default remedies under Article 2 of the UCC.
- Pet Dealers Association of New Jersey, representing pet dealers, sued to invalidate the regulations.
- Pet Dealers argued the regulations were invalid because they allegedly conflicted with Article 2 of the UCC by expanding consumer remedies beyond the Code.
- Pet Dealers also argued the regulations violated equal protection by subjecting pet dealers (or sellers of dogs and cats) to special regulatory obligations.
- The Law Division upheld the regulations, and Pet Dealers appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether regulations adopted under the Consumer Fraud Act governing the sale of pet cats and dogs are invalid because they provide remedies broader than those provided by Article 2 of the UCC.
2. Whether the regulations violate equal protection by creating an unlawful classification that targets pet dealers (or sellers of cats and dogs) for special regulation.

## Decision

- The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment upholding the regulations.
- The court held the regulations did not conflict with the UCC and were a valid exercise of police power implemented through the Consumer Fraud Act.
- The court held the regulations did not violate equal protection because the classification was rational and did not reflect invidious discrimination.

## Legal Principles

- The UCC’s sales provisions are designed to provide certainty and stability in commercial transactions and do not bar the State’s exercise of police power in the public interest through additional consumer protections.
- Consumer-protection regulations promulgated by the Attorney General under the Consumer Fraud Act are valid if they further the Act’s purpose of preventing consumer fraud, even when they supplement remedies otherwise available under Article 2 of the UCC.
- Economic regulations aimed at a particular industry are generally upheld under equal protection if the classification is rationally related to legitimate governmental interests and does not involve invidious discrimination.

## Conclusion

The Appellate Division upheld New Jersey’s pet-sale regulations as a lawful consumer-protection measure under the Consumer Fraud Act, rejecting claims that the rules were invalid due to inconsistency with UCC Article 2 or unconstitutional under equal protection.


Pet Dealers Ass'n of N.J., Inc. v. Div. of Consumer Affs., Dep't of L. & Pub. Safety, 149 N.J. Super. 235, 373 A.2d 688 (App. Div. 1977)