Minnesota Deceptive Trade Practices Act

Minnesota’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act (“DTP”) creates a private right of action for a person who is likely to be damaged by a deceptive trade practice. Under Minn. Stat. § 325D.44, subdivision 1, a person engages in a deceptive trade practice when, in the course of business, vocation, or occupation, the person:

  1. passes off goods or services as those of another,
  2. causes likelihood of confusion or of misunderstanding as to the source, sponsorship, approval, or certification of goods or services,
  3. causes likelihood of confusion or of misunderstanding as to affiliation, connection, or association with, or certification by another,
  4. uses deceptive representations or designations of geographic origin in connection with goods or services,
  5. represents that goods or services have sponsorship, approval, characteristics, ingredients, uses, benefits, or quantities that they do not have or that a person has sponsorship, approval, status, affiliation, or connection that the person does not have,
  6. represents that goods are original or new if they are deteriorated, altered, reconditioned, reclaimed, used, or second-hand,
  7. represents that goods or services are of a particular standard, quality, or grade, or that goods are of a particular style or model if they are of another,
  8. disparages the goods, services, or business of another by false or misleading representation of fact,
  9. advertises goods or services with intent not to sell them as advertised,
  10. advertises goods or services with intent not to supply reasonably expectable public demand unless the advertisement discloses a limitation of quantity,
  11. makes false or misleading statements of fact concerning the reasons for, existence of, or amounts of prices reductions,
  12. in attempting to collect delinquent accounts, implies or suggests that health care services will be withheld in an emergency situation,
  13. engages in (i) unfair methods of competition, or (ii) unfair or unconscionable acts or practices, or
  14. engages in any other conduct that similarly creates a likelihood of confusion or misunderstanding.

Clause 13 was added by the legislature in 2023. For claims under clause 13, a distinct standard of proof applies, keyed to Minn. Stat. § 325F.69, subdivision 8. Separately, subdivision 1a of the statute, added in 2024 and amended in 2025, makes it a deceptive trade practice to advertise, display, or offer a price for goods or services that does not include all mandatory fees or surcharges, subject to carve-outs for delivery platforms, auctions, variable-cost services, shipping, and discounted pricing.

Any party asserting a claim under the DTPA does not need to prove competition between the parties or any confusion or misunderstanding.

Standing

Any person “likely to be damaged by a deceptive trade practice of another” can bring a claim under the DTPA. Minn. Stat. § 325D.45, subd. 1. Unlike the Federal Lanham Act, the DTPA allows consumers to directly bring suits against businesses for misleading trade practices.

Elements

For a plaintiff to be successful under the DTPA, he or she must prove that 1) the defendant made false or misleading statements in commercial advertising, 2) those statements actually deceived, or have a tendency to deceive a substantial segment of their audience, 3) such deception is likely to influence buying decisions, 4) the plaintiffs have been or are likely to be injured as a direct result of those activities. I-Systems, Inc. v. Softwares, Inc., 2004 WL 742082 (D. Minn. March 29, 2004).

Remedies

A plaintiff is not allowed to recover monetary damages under the DTPA, so, what damages are available to a plaintiff? First, the DTPA provides for injunctive relief, and Minnesota courts have stated that injunctive relief is an available remedy for a DTPA violation, and the statute makes clear that such relief is cumulative with, not exclusive of, other remedies. If a request for an injunction is brought under the DTPA the court may grant an injunction if 1) the prerequisites for the remedy have been demonstrated and 2) the injunction accords with the principles of equity and terms the court considers reasonable.

Attorney’s Fees and Costs

Even though a plaintiff cannot recover damages under the DTPA, the DTPA does provide for Attorney’s fees and costs to a prevailing party. Under the statute, a “court may award attorney’s fees to the prevailing party if (1) the party complaining of a deceptive trade practice has brought an action knowing it to be groundless, or (2) the party charged with a deceptive trade practice has willfully engaged in the trade practice knowing it to be deceptive. Minn. Stat. § 325d.45. Unlike attorneys’ fees, which the court may award only in limited circumstances, costs are allowed to the prevailing party unless the court otherwise directs.