SB 256 — AN ACT TO AMEND TITLES 6 AND 29 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO CONSUMER PROTECTION.
Last action — Signed by Governor
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓Passed House
-
✓To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced March 21, 2024. Enacted.
Odds of enactment
High chanceBased on the sponsor, cosponsors, and committee posture, this bill has a high chance of becoming law.
Upgrade to see the exact probability and what's driving it.
A statistical estimate from our own model of past outcomes — an insight, not a guarantee. Policymaking is volatile.
Prognosis
-
Enacted
Current position in the legislative process.
-
9 sponsors
9 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Bipartisan support
Sponsored across 2 parties (6 D · 1 R) — cross-party backing.
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 2 recorded votes so far.
Based on stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes, and cross-state momentum — a description of the observable signals, not a prediction.
Summary
This Act clarifies the Attorney General’s existing authority to enforce the State’s consumer protection laws, specifically the Attorney General’s ability to pursue non-penalty civil remedies, such as damages and restitution, without having to show that a person’s violation of a law or regulation enforced by the Department of Justice’s Division of Consumer Protection was wilful. This Act does not change the requirement that the Attorney General show that such a violation was wilful in order to obtain civil penalties from a court or hearing officer. Every other state that has a similar state of mind requirement in their consumer fraud law does not impose that state of mind requirement for non-penalty civil remedies. By harmonizing the language in the Consumer Fraud Act (Subchapter II, Chapter 25, Title 6 of the Code) and the Division of Consumer Protection’s enabling statute (Subchapter II, Chapter 25, Title 29 of the Code), this Act clarifies that Delaware is line with the other states. This Act also strikes outdated language in the Consumer Fraud Act requiring cases to be filed in specific counties, as the Superior Court and the Court of Chancery have both eliminated their historical county filing requirement. Additionally, this Act fixes inconsistencies with the Summary Cease and Desist Order process, by clarifying that an alleged violator must request a hearing in order to trigger the Division of Consumer Protection’s obligation to hold a hearing. This Act further clarifies the Summary Cease and Desist Order process, such as by making explicit the alleged violator’s right to postpone a hearing and final order, changing the various 10 day requirements to 15 business days, and removing the requirement for a complaint to accompany the original summary cease and desist order.
Bill Text
What changed in the latest version
131 added · 21 removed131 line(s) added, 21 removed.
Gay DELAWARE& STATERep. SENATE 152nd GENERAL ASSEMBLY SENATE AMENDMENT NO.
1Griffith TO& SENATERep. BILL NO.
256Bush AMENDSens. Senate Bill No.
256Lockman, onSokola, lineWilson; 17 by deleting "pay damages," as it appears therein.
FURTHERReps. AMEND Senate Bill No.
256Baumbach, onHeffernan, lineOsienski 32DELAWARE bySTATE deletingSENATE "above"152nd asGENERAL itASSEMBLY appearsSENATE therein.BILL NO.
FURTHER256 AN ACT TO AMEND SenateTITLES Bill6 No.AND 29 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO CONSUMER PROTECTION.
256BE onIT lineENACTED 34BY byTHE deletingGENERAL "payASSEMBLY damages,"OF asTHE itSTATE appearsOF therein.DELAWARE:
FURTHERSection AMEND1. Senate Bill No.
256Amend on§ line2522, 42Title by6 deletingof "ofthe thisDelaware chapter."Code by making deletions as itshown appearsby thereinstrike through and insertinginsertions inas lieushown thereofby "ofunderline thisas title.".follows:
FURTHER§ AMEND2522. Senate Bill No.
256Proceedings onbrought line 43 by deletingthe "ofAttorney thisGeneral. chapter." as it appears therein and inserting in lieu thereof "of this title.".
FURTHER(a) AMENDWhenever Senateit Billappears No.to the Attorney General that a person has engaged in, is engaging in or is about to engage in any practice declared by this subchapter to be unlawful, the Attorney General may institute an action in accordance with subchapter II of Chapter 25 of Title 29 in order to enjoin such practices or any acts being done in furtherance thereof.
256The oncomplaint lineshall 62state bythe deletingnature "damages,"of asthe itconduct appearsconstituting therein.a violation of this subchapter and the relief sought thereunder.
FURTHERSuch AMENDaction Senateshall Billbe No.brought in a court of competent jurisdiction in the county in which the alleged unlawful practice has been, is, or is about to be performed.
256(b) onIf linea 73court byof insertingcompetent “,jurisdiction whichfinds orderthat mustany includeperson findingshas ofwilfully factviolated andthis conclusionssubchapter, ofupon lawpetition sufficient to putthe court by the respondentAttorney onGeneral noticein the original complaint or made at any time following the court’s finding of a wilful violation, the reasonsperson forshall forfeit and pay to the issuanceState a civil penalty of thenot order.”more afterthan “order.”$10,000 therein.for each violation.
SYNOPSISFor Thispurposes Amendmentof clarifiesthis thesubchapter, Summarya Ceasewilful andviolation Desistoccurs Order process by requiring that, when the Directorperson ofcommitting the Divisionviolation ofknew Consumer Protection, or theshould Director'shave designee,known issuesthat a cease and desist order pursuant to § 2525(c) of Title 29, the orderconduct mustwas include findings of fact and conclusions of law sufficient to put the respondentnature onprohibited noticeby ofthis thesubchapter. reasons for issuance of the order.
Finally,(c) theIf Amendmenta makescourt technicalof changescompetent tojurisdiction SBfinds 256that any person has violated this subchapter, upon petition to conformthe court by the Attorney General in the original complaint or made at any time following the court’s finding of a violation, the court may order the violator to cease and desist the Legislativeunlawful Draftingconduct Manual.prospectively, pay damages, return any moneys obtained unlawfully, and when appropriate freeze designated assets of the violator, order restitution, rescission, or recoupment, or grant other relief appropriate to prevent violators from being unjustly enriched.
Section 2.
Amend § 2522, Title 29 of the Delaware Code by making deletions as shown by strike through and insertions as shown by underline as follows:
§ 2522.
Proceedings;
judicial remedies.
(a) The Attorney General and the Director shall have standing to seek, on behalf of the State, any remedy in this SD :
MD :
ALW Page 1 of 4 Released:
03/21/2024 03:23 PM chapter whenever it appears that a person has violated or is about to violate any provision of Chapter 25 of Title 6, any provision of Chapter 35 of Title 6, Chapters 51 through 67 of Title 25, Chapter 70 of Title 25, §§ 841, 914, 915, and 915A of Title 11, or any other law or regulation that the Division of Consumer Protection is authorized to enforce.
The Attorney General or the Director may initiate an investigation, administrative proceeding, or court proceeding to enjoin or sanction the unlawful conduct.
(b) If, in any court proceeding brought under subsection (a) of this section above, any person is found to have committed a wilful violation, the court shall order the violator to pay to the State a civil penalty of not more than $10,000 for each violation.
(c) If, in any court proceeding brought under subsection (a) of this section above, any person is found to have committed a violation, the court Where a wilful violation is found, any court entertaining the action may additionally order the violator to cease and desist the unlawful conduct prospectively, pay damages, return any moneys obtained unlawfully, and when appropriate freeze designated assets of the violator, order restitution, rescission, or recoupment, or grant to seek other relief appropriate to prevent violators from being unjustly enriched.
Section 3.
Amend § 2524, Title 29 of the Delaware Code by making deletions as shown by strike through and insertions as shown by underline as follows:
§ 2524.
Administrative remedies.
(a) After notice and an administrative hearing, any violation or apparent threat of violation of any provision of Chapter 25 of Title 6, or of any law or regulation the Division of Consumer Protection is charged to enforce, may be sanctioned by the issuance of a cease and desist order as provided in § 2525 of this chapter.
(b) If, in any administrative proceeding brought under § 2523 of this chapter, a person is found to have committed a wilful violation, the Director or hearing officer shall order the violator to pay to the State a civil penalty of not more than $5,000 for each violation.
After notice and an administrative hearing, any wilful violation of § 2513 or § 2532 of Title 6, or of a lawful cease and desist order of the Director or the hearing officer, may be sanctioned by an administrative penalty up to $5000 per violation, a cease and desist order, and an order of restitution, rescission, recoupment, or other relief appropriate to prevent violators from being unjustly enriched.
(c) After the expiration of the 30-day appeal period in which no appeal has been filed, if the violator fails to pay all penalties and restitution or other amounts administratively determined, the Director may file a complaint in any court of competent jurisdiction and obtain a judgment for the amounts that have not been paid.
The amounts shall be treated by the court as an unpaid debt, and the merits of the administrative findings may not be contested.
Section 4.
Show all 83 changed lines (43 more)
Amend § 2525, Title 29 of the Delaware Code by making deletions as shown by strike through and SD :
MD :
ALW Page 2 of 4 Released:
03/21/2024 03:23 PM insertions as shown by underline as follows:
§ 2525.
Cease and desist orders.
(a) By agreement.
— At any time after it appears to the Director that a person has engaged in, is engaging in, or is about to engage in any practice declared to be unlawful by Chapter 25 of Title 6, Chapter 35 of Title 6, Chapters 51 through 67 of Title 25, Chapter 70 of Title 25, or any other laws and regulations which the Division of Consumer Protection is authorized to enforce, the Director may issue a cease and desist order pursuant to an agreement with such person.
Each such agreement may provide for:
(1) The immediate discontinuance of each practice set forth in the agreement;
(2) Any such relief, remedies, penalties, fines, damages, or recoveries authorized by this chapter, including restitution, rescission, recoupment, or other relief appropriate to prevent violators from being unjustly enriched;
and (3) Any other action deemed by the Director to be necessary to remedy such practice or practices.
(b) By administrative order.
— Upon the finding of a violation of any provision of Chapter 25 of Title 6, or of any law or regulation the Division of Consumer Protection is charged to enforce, after notice and a hearing, the designated hearing officer may issue a cease and desist order against the violator.
Such cease and desist order may provide for any relief as indicated in subsection (a) of this section above.
(c) By summary administrative order.
— (1) Where the Director in the Director’s discretion perceives an immediate threat to the public interest as a result of a violation of any provision of Chapter 25 of Title 6, or of any law or regulation the Division of Consumer Protection is charged to enforce, the Director may issue a summary cease and desist order ordering an immediate discontinuance of the unlawful practice identified in the order.
A complaint detailing the specific allegations against the alleged violator shall accompany any summary cease and desist order served upon the alleged violator.
Before issuing the summary order, the Director or the Director’s designee shall attempt to obtain voluntary compliance from the alleged violator by letter or telephone call.
(2) The complaint and summary cease and desist order shall be served upon the alleged violator by first class and certified mail to the alleged violator’s last known address.
Service shall be deemed effective upon mailing.
Within 10 15 business days after the mailing of the complaint and summary order, the alleged violator may request, in writing, a hearing on the charges.
An summary order that was not the subject of a hearing may not be appealed to the Superior Court.
(3) If the alleged violator makes a written request for a hearing, Tthe Division of Consumer Protection shall provide a hearing on the charges in the complaint within 10 15 business days after the issuance of the SD :
MD :
ALW Page 3 of 4 Released:
03/21/2024 03:23 PM 84 complaint and the cease and desist order receipt by the Director of Consumer Protection of the alleged violator’s written request for a hearing.
A written opinion and order, containing findings of fact and conclusions of law, shall issue within 10 15 business days after the close of the hearing.
(4) If the alleged violator makes a written request for a hearing but none is provided within 10 15 business days after the issuance of the order receipt by the Director of Consumer Protection of the written request for a hearing, the summary order shall expire at the end of the tenth fifteenth business day after it was issued the receipt by the Director of Consumer Protection of the written request for a hearing unless the alleged violator waives that alleged violator’s right to a prompt hearing by agreeing to a hearing at a later date.
If the alleged violator makes a written request for a hearing and one is provided within 10 15 business days of the receipt by the Director of Consumer Protection of the written request, but no decision order is issued within 10 15 business days after the close of the hearing, the summary order shall expire at the end of the tenth fifteenth business day after the close of the hearing, unless the alleged violator agrees to be bound by the summary order until a later date.
An order that has expired in accordance with the restrictions of this paragraph may not be reissued as a summary order.
(5) The order issued after the hearing may provide for any administrative remedy contained in § 2524 of this title.
Any person aggrieved by the order issued after the hearing shall have 30 days to appeal the order to the Superior Court, as provided in § 2523(d) of this title.
(6) Any person who wilfully violates a cease and desist order may be sanctioned as provided in § 2524(b) or § 2526 of this title.
SYNOPSIS This Act clarifies the Attorney General’s existing authority to enforce the State’s consumer protection laws, specifically the Attorney General’s ability to pursue non-penalty civil remedies, such as damages and restitution, without having to show that a person’s violation of a law or regulation enforced by the Department of Justice’s Division of Consumer Protection was wilful.
This Act does not change the requirement that the Attorney General show that such a violation was wilful in order to obtain civil penalties from a court or hearing officer.
Every other state that has a similar state of mind requirement in their consumer fraud law does not impose that state of mind requirement for non-penalty civil remedies.
By harmonizing the language in the Consumer Fraud Act (Subchapter II, Chapter 25, Title 6 of the Code) and the Division of Consumer Protection’s enabling statute (Subchapter II, Chapter 25, Title 29 of the Code), this Act clarifies that Delaware is line with the other states.
This Act also strikes outdated language in the Consumer Fraud Act requiring cases to be filed in specific counties, as the Superior Court and the Court of Chancery have both eliminated their historical county filing requirement.
Additionally, this Act fixes inconsistencies with the Summary Cease and Desist Order process, by clarifying that an alleged violator must request a hearing in order to trigger the Division of Consumer Protection’s obligation to hold a hearing.
This Act further clarifies the Summary Cease and Desist Order process, such as by making explicit the alleged violator’s right to postpone a hearing and final order, changing the various 10 day requirements to 15 business days, and removing the requirement for a complaint to accompany the original summary cease and desist order.
ALW Page 14 of 14 Released:
06/11/202403/21/2024 01:3003:23 PM 27115201692711520105
Show all 83 changed rows (43 more)
Action History
-
Signed by Governor
-
Passed By House. Votes: 37 YES 4 ABSENT
-
Reported Out of Committee (Economic Development/Banking/Insurance & Commerce) in House with 7 On Its Merits
-
Assigned to Economic Development/Banking/Insurance & Commerce Committee in House
-
Passed By Senate. Votes: 21 YES
-
Amendment SA 1 to SB 256 - Passed By Senate. Votes: 21 YES
-
Amendment SA 1 to SB 256 - Introduced and Placed With Bill
-
Reported Out of Committee (Judiciary) in Senate with 4 Favorable, 1 On Its Merits
-
Introduced and Assigned to Judiciary Committee in Senate
Sponsors
- Kyle Evans Gay · Primary
- Edward S. Osienski · Primary
- Russell Huxtable · Primary
- David L. Wilson · Primary
- David P. Sokola · Primary
- S. Elizabeth Lockman · Primary
- William Bush · Primary
- Nicole Poore · Primary
- Paul S. Baumbach · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →9 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 53 not signed on
Sponsors (9)
- Kyle Evans Gay
- Edward S. Osienski Democratic
- Russell Huxtable Democratic
- David L. Wilson Republican
- David P. Sokola Democratic
- S. Elizabeth Lockman Democratic
- William Bush Democratic
- Nicole Poore Democratic
- Paul S. Baumbach
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (53)
53 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 53 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 5 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Democratic | 19 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Republican | 13 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 37 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| % of votes cast | 90% | 0% | 0% | 10% |
How each member voted (41)
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 21 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (21)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Kyle Evans Gay | — | Yea |
| Sarah McBride | — | Yea |
| Bryan Townsend | Democratic | Yea |
| Darius J. Brown | Democratic | Yea |
| David P. Sokola | Democratic | Yea |
| John "Jack" Walsh | Democratic | Yea |
| Kyra L. Hoffner | Democratic | Yea |
| Laura V. Sturgeon | Democratic | Yea |
| Marie Pinkney | Democratic | Yea |
| Nicole Poore | Democratic | Yea |
| Russell Huxtable | Democratic | Yea |
| S. Elizabeth Lockman | Democratic | Yea |
| Spiros Mantzavinos | Democratic | Yea |
| Stephanie L. Hansen | Democratic | Yea |
| Trey Paradee | Democratic | Yea |
| Brian Pettyjohn | Republican | Yea |
| Bryant L. Richardson | Republican | Yea |
| Dave G. Lawson | Republican | Yea |
| David L. Wilson | Republican | Yea |
| Eric Buckson | Republican | Yea |
| Gerald W. Hocker | Republican | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 256 do?
- This Act clarifies the Attorney General’s existing authority to enforce the State’s consumer protection laws, specifically the Attorney General’s ability to pursue non-penalty civil remedies, such as damages and restitution, without having to show that a person’s violation of a law or regulation enforced by the Department of Justice’s Division of Consumer Protection was wilful. This Act does not change the requirement that the Attorney General show that such a violation was wilful in order to obtain civil penalties from a court or hearing officer. Every other state that has a similar state of mind requirement in their consumer fraud law does not impose that state of mind requirement for non-penalty civil remedies. By harmonizing the language in the Consumer Fraud Act (Subchapter II, Chapter 25, Title 6 of the Code) and the Division of Consumer Protection’s enabling statute (Subchapter II, Chapter 25, Title 29 of the Code), this Act clarifies that Delaware is line with the other states. This Act also strikes outdated language in the Consumer Fraud Act requiring cases to be filed in specific counties, as the Superior Court and the Court of Chancery have both eliminated their historical county filing requirement. Additionally, this Act fixes inconsistencies with the Summary Cease and Desist Order process, by clarifying that an alleged violator must request a hearing in order to trigger the Division of Consumer Protection’s obligation to hold a hearing. This Act further clarifies the Summary Cease and Desist Order process, such as by making explicit the alleged violator’s right to postpone a hearing and final order, changing the various 10 day requirements to 15 business days, and removing the requirement for a complaint to accompany the original summary cease and desist order.
- Who sponsors SB 256?
- SB 256 is sponsored by Kyle Evans Gay, Edward S. Osienski (Democratic), Russell Huxtable (Democratic), David L. Wilson (Republican), David P. Sokola (Democratic), S. Elizabeth Lockman (Democratic), William Bush (Democratic), Nicole Poore (Democratic), and Paul S. Baumbach.
- What is the current status of SB 256?
- This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced March 21, 2024. Enacted.
- Where can I track SB 256?
- Track SB 256 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 256
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 256
Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →