Bookmark and Share



» Access to Courts and Court Remedies

» Campaign Finance and Election Laws

» Constitutional Rights and Requirements

» Health, Safety, and Environment

» Open Government and Open Courts

» Representing Consumers

» Workers' Rights

Currently Featured Topics

Government Transparency
Consumer Justice
First Amendment
Health, Safety and the Environment


Read about our work helping lawyers
with cases in the Supreme Court.


  Public Citizen | Litigation Cases ***Search other cases***

Palmer v.

Topic(s): Consumer Justice
Internet Free Speech - Miscellaneous


Related Press Releases:


Five years ago, John Palmer ordered Christmas gifts online from a web merchant called The gifts never arrived, and John’s attempts to contact were unsuccessful. His wife then posted a negative review on In 2012, the Palmers received a demand from for $3500. According to, through his wife’s post, John violated a “non-disparagement clause” in the site’s Terms of Use that prohibits users from taking any action that negatively impacts or its reputation, on pain of a $3500 fine.

When the Palmers refused to pay – in part because the Term was not on the website at the time of his – reported the supposed “debt” to the credit reporting agencies. When the Palmers disputed the debt with the credit reporting agencies, confirmed the supposed “debt” to the credit reporting agencies. More than a year later – after the Palmers have been turned down for credit, and had their car loan delayed and paid a higher interest rate on it – this “debt” still mars John Palmer’s credit.

On December 18, 2013, Public Citizen filed suit against and its debt collector in federal court on behalf of the Palmers. The suit seeks a declaration that John does not owe any “debt” for violating the “non-disparagement clause,” and it seeks compensatory and punitive damages from for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, defamation, interference with prospective economic relations, and infliction of emotional distress.

Because never appeared to defend, on May 15, 2014, the district court granted the Palmers a default judgment declaring that “John Palmer does not now, and never did, owe or any other party any money based on's ‘non-disparagement clause’”; holding liable for violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act and common law; and setting a hearing to determine damages. On June 25, 2014, the district court held a damages hearing, heard testimony from the Palmers, and awarded them $102,250 in compensatory damages and $204,500 in punitive damages for a total award of $306,750 (in addition to costs and attorneys’ fees).

Responding to the Palmers’ experience with KlearGear, California enacted a law in 2014 banning the use of non-disparagement clauses in consumer contracts. Similar bans were introduced in both houses of Congress in 2015, and Jen Palmer testified live before the U.S. Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation in November 2015. Public Citizen submitted written testimony to the Committee as well. With Public Citizen’s support, the Consumer Review Freedom Act passed the Senate in December 2015.

Copyright © 2017 Public Citizen. Some rights reserved. Non-commercial use of text and images in which Public Citizen holds the copyright is permitted, with attribution, under the terms and conditions of a Creative Commons License. This Web site is shared by Public Citizen Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation. Learn More about the distinction between these two components of Public Citizen.

Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation


Together, two separate corporate entities called Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation, Inc., form Public Citizen. Both entities are part of the same overall organization, and this Web site refers to the two organizations collectively as Public Citizen.

Although the work of the two components overlaps, some activities are done by one component and not the other. The primary distinction is with respect to lobbying activity. Public Citizen, Inc., an IRS § 501(c)(4) entity, lobbies Congress to advance Public Citizen’s mission of protecting public health and safety, advancing government transparency, and urging corporate accountability. Public Citizen Foundation, however, is an IRS § 501(c)(3) organization. Accordingly, its ability to engage in lobbying is limited by federal law, but it may receive donations that are tax-deductible by the contributor. Public Citizen Inc. does most of the lobbying activity discussed on the Public Citizen Web site. Public Citizen Foundation performs most of the litigation and education activities discussed on the Web site.

You may make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., Public Citizen Foundation, or both. Contributions to both organizations are used to support our public interest work. However, each Public Citizen component will use only the funds contributed directly to it to carry out the activities it conducts as part of Public Citizen’s mission. Only gifts to the Foundation are tax-deductible. Individuals who want to join Public Citizen should make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., which will not be tax deductible.


To become a member of Public Citizen, click here.
To become a member and make an additional tax-deductible donation to Public Citizen Foundation, click here.