{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\uc1\deff0\stshfdbch0\stshfloch0\stshfhich0\stshfbi0\deflang1033\deflangfe1033{\fonttbl{\f0\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020603050405020304}Times New Roman{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f63\froman\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 02020602080505020303}Baskerville Old Face;}{\f169\fnil\fcharset0\fprq2{\*\panose 00000400000000000000}WP TypographicSymbols;}{\f172\froman\fcharset238\fprq2 Times New Roman CE{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f173\froman\fcharset204\fprq2 Times New Roman Cyr{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f175\froman\fcharset161\fprq2 Times New Roman Greek{\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f176\froman\fcharset162\fprq2 Times New Roman Tur{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f177\froman\fcharset177\fprq2 Times New Roman (Hebrew){\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f178\froman\fcharset178\fprq2 Times New Roman (Arabic){\*\falt Times New Roman};}{\f179\froman\fcharset186\fprq2 Times New Roman Baltic{\*\falt Times New Roman};}
{\f180\froman\fcharset163\fprq2 Times New Roman (Vietnamese){\*\falt Times New Roman};}}{\colortbl;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;\red0\green255\blue255;\red0\green255\blue0;\red255\green0\blue255;\red255\green0\blue0;\red255\green255\blue0;
\red255\green255\blue255;\red0\green0\blue128;\red0\green128\blue128;\red0\green128\blue0;\red128\green0\blue128;\red128\green0\blue0;\red128\green128\blue0;\red128\green128\blue128;\red192\green192\blue192;\red255\green255\blue255;}{\stylesheet{
\ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \snext0 Normal;}{\*\cs10 \additive \ssemihidden Default Paragraph Font;}{\*
\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidthB3\trpaddl108\trpaddr108\trpaddfl3\trpaddft3\trpaddfb3\trpaddfr3\tscellwidthfts0\tsvertalt\tsbrdrt\tsbrdrl\tsbrdrb\tsbrdrr\tsbrdrdgl\tsbrdrdgr\tsbrdrh\tsbrdrv 
\ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\cgrid\langnp1024\langfenp1024 \snext11 \ssemihidden Normal Table;}{\*\cs15 \additive \sbasedon10 \ssemihidden footnote reference;}{
\s16\ql \li1440\ri720\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin1440\itap0 \f63\fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 \sbasedon0 \snext16 FOOTNOTE TEX;}}{\*\rsidtbl \rsid4744362\rsid4860763\rsid5910306\rsid8477135\rsid9508377}
{\*\generator Microsoft Word 10.0.6764;}{\info{\author lroberto}{\operator blake_r}{\creatim\yr2005\mo8\dy12\hr9\min1}{\revtim\yr2006\mo3\dy20\hr11\min24}{\version4}{\edmins6}{\nofpages2}{\nofwords3618}{\nofchars20629}{\*\company Superior Court of Guam}
{\nofcharsws24199}{\vern16391}}\margl2160\margr720\margb1080 \widowctrl\ftnbj\aenddoc\notabind\wraptrsp\transmf\noxlattoyen\expshrtn\noultrlspc\dntblnsbdb\nospaceforul\truncatefontheight\subfontbysize\sprsbsp\wpjst\lytprtmet\hyphcaps0\horzdoc\dghspace120
\dgvspace120\dghorigin1701\dgvorigin1984\dghshow0\dgvshow3\jcompress\viewkind4\viewscale100\nolnhtadjtbl\rsidroot4860763 \fet0{\*\ftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {
\insrsid4860763 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\ftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid4860763 \chftnsepc 
\par }}{\*\aftnsep \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid4860763 \chftnsep 
\par }}{\*\aftnsepc \pard\plain \ql \li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid4860763 \chftnsepc 
\par }}\sectd \sbknone\linex0\headery1440\footery1080\sectdefaultcl\sectrsid4860763\sftnbj {\header \pard\plain \qj \fi-8640\li8640\ri0\sl480\slmult1\nowidctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin8640\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {
\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid8477135 {\shp{\*\shpinst\shpleft-720\shptop0\shpright8640\shpbottom13680\shpfhdr1\shpbxmargin\shpbxignore\shpbymargin\shpbyignore\shpwr3\shpwrk0\shpfblwtxt1\shpz0\shplid2061
{\sp{\sn shapeType}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn fFlipH}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFlipV}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn lTxid}{\sv 851968}}{\sp{\sn dxTextLeft}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn dyTextTop}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn dxTextRight}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn dyTextBottom}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fFilled}{\sv 0}}
{\sp{\sn lineWidth}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fLine}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fShadow}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn posrelh}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn posrelv}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}{\sp{\sn fBehindDocument}{\sv 1}}{\sp{\sn fLayoutInCell}{\sv 0}}{\shptxt \trowd \irow12\irowband12
\ts11\trleft-1080\trftsWidth1 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1528\clshdrawnil \cellx448\pard\plain \qr \li0\ri0\sl-476\slmult0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid4860763 1
\par 2
\par 3
\par 4
\par 5
\par 6
\par 7
\par 8
\par 9
\par 10
\par 11
\par 12
\par 13
\par 14
\par 15
\par 16
\par 17
\par 18
\par 19
\par 20
\par 21
\par 22
\par 23
\par 24
\par 25
\par 26
\par 27
\par 28\cell }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 {\insrsid4860763 \trowd \irow12\irowband12\ts11\trleft-1080\trftsWidth1 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone 
\cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1528\clshdrawnil \cellx448\row }}}{\shprslt{\*\do\dobxmargin\dobymargin\dodhgt0\dptxbx\dptxlrtb{\dptxbxtext\trowd \irow12\irowband12\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidth1 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone 
\clbrdrr\brdrnone \cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1528\clshdrawnil \cellx448\pard\plain \qr \li0\ri0\sl-476\slmult0\nowidctlpar\intbl\faauto\rin0\lin0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid4860763 1
\par 2
\par 3
\par 4
\par 5
\par 6
\par 7
\par 8
\par 9
\par 10
\par 11
\par 12
\par 13
\par 14
\par 15
\par 16
\par 17
\par 18
\par 19
\par 20
\par 21
\par 22
\par 23
\par 24
\par 25
\par 26
\par 27
\par 28\cell }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\intbl\aspalpha\aspnum\faauto\adjustright\rin0\lin0 {\insrsid4860763 \trowd \irow12\irowband12\ts11\tsrowd\trftsWidth1 \clvertalt\clbrdrt\brdrnone \clbrdrl\brdrnone \clbrdrb\brdrnone \clbrdrr\brdrnone 
\cltxlrtb\clftsWidth3\clwWidth1528\clshdrawnil \cellx448\row }}\dpx-720\dpy0\dpxsize9360\dpysize13680\dpfillfgcr255\dpfillfgcg255\dpfillfgcb255\dpfillbgcr255\dpfillbgcg255\dpfillbgcb255\dpfillpat0\dplinehollow}}}}{\fs20\ul\insrsid4860763 
Territory of Guam v. Marfega}{\fs20\insrsid4860763 /CVA97-011/Opinion}{\insrsid4860763 \tab \tab     \tab \tab \tab \tab }{\fs20\insrsid4860763 \tab   Page }{\field{\*\fldinst {\fs20\insrsid4860763 PAGE }}{\fldrslt {
\fs20\lang1024\langfe1024\noproof\insrsid8477135 1}}}{\fs20\insrsid4860763 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\sl480\slmult1\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid4860763 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\sl-216\slmult0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\insrsid4860763 
\par }}{\*\pnseclvl1\pnucrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl2\pnucltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl3\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta .}}{\*\pnseclvl4\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxta )}}
{\*\pnseclvl5\pndec\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl6\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl7\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl8
\pnlcltr\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}{\*\pnseclvl9\pnlcrm\pnstart1\pnindent720\pnhang {\pntxtb (}{\pntxta )}}\pard\plain \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 
\fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM}{\b\insrsid5910306\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qj \fi-2160\li2160\ri0\widctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin2160\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 GUAM,}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab \tab \tab \tab \tab )}{\insrsid5910306 \tab Supreme Court Case No.}{
\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  CVA97-011
\par }\pard \qj \fi4320\li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 )}{\insrsid5910306 \tab }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Superior Court Case No.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 CV1777-93}
{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Plaintiff-Appellant,\tab \tab )
\par }\pard \qj \fi4320\li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 )
\par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 v.\tab \tab \tab \tab )\tab \tab }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 OPINION}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qj \fi4320\li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 )
\par }\pard \qj \fi-4320\li4320\ri0\widctlpar\tx-1440\faauto\rin0\lin4320\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 MARFEGA TRADING CO., INC.,}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab \tab )
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 dba ISLANDER RENT-A-CAR,}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab \tab )
\par }\pard \qj \fi4320\li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 )
\par }\pard \qj \fi1440\li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Defendant-Appellee.\tab \tab )
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 ____________________________________)
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Filed: May 18, 1998
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Cite as: 1998 Guam 4
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Appeal }{\insrsid5910306 from the Superior Court of Guam}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
\par Argued and}{\insrsid5910306  Submitted on December 10, 1997}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
\par H\'e5gat\'f1a, Guam}{\insrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\ul\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Appearing for the Plaintiff-Appellant:}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
\par Amy}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Brothers 
\par Assistant Attorney General
\par Office of the Attorney General
\par Suite 2-200E, Judicial Center Building
\par 120 West O'Brien Drive
\par H\'e5gat\'f1a, Guam 96910}{\insrsid5910306 
\par 
\par }{\ul\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Appearing for the Defendant-Appellee:
\par }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Mitchell F. Thompson
\par Maher & Thompson, P.C.
\par 230 West Soledad Avenue, Suite 300
\par H\'e5gat\'f1a, Guam 96910
\par 
\par BEFORE:}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 PETER C. SIGUENZA, Chief Justice; JANET HEALY WEEKS, and BENJAMIN J. F. CRUZ, Associate Justices.}{\insrsid5910306 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 CRUZ, J.:
\par }{\insrsid5910306\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [1]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Defendant-Appellee Marfega Trading Co., Inc., dba Islander Rent-A-Car.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Plaintiff-Appellant claims the trial court erred in determining that as a matter of law Defendant-Appellee's practice of charging a 5% fee or tax was not in violation of Guam's Deceptive Trade Practices Act or 11 GCA }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  26115.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Plaintiff-Appellant seeks reversal of summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff-Appellant.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Accordingly, the Court reve
rses the trial court's decision and grants summary judgment in favor of Plaintiff-Appellant.}{\cs15\super\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \s16\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\f63\fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\fs24\super\insrsid4860763 \chftn }{\insrsid4860763 
  Courts of this jurisdiction have previously granted summary judgment in favor of the appellant after the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the appellee.}{\i\insrsid4860763   See, e.g.}{\insrsid4860763 , }{\i\insrsid4860763 
Government of Guam v. Perez}{\insrsid4860763 , Civ. Case Nos. 87-053A, 87-055A (D. Guam App. Div. July 8, 1988).
\par }}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid8477135\charrsid8477135 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [2]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab The Defendant-Appellee began operation of a car rental service in 1990 with its principal place of business at the A.B. Won Pat International Airport, Guam.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 There was no published advertising in newspapers nor were any radio or television ads ever prepared or broadcast.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
However, Defendant-Appellee did post a sign at its booth at the airport that listed its car rental rates.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
The original sign indicated an additional 5% tax charged for car rentals, but after some inquiries by government agencies the sign was changed to read "Plus Service Charge of 5%."}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [3]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab 
Deposition testimony given by Elizabeth Marfega, previously the Guam branch manager for Defendant-Appellee, indicated that the 5% fee charged on line 36 of every rental contract was sales tax.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
She stated that the charge was sales tax--that "we" meaning the employees called it a sales tax.}{\insrsid8477135 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [4]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab Lee Arnold, the General Manager for the Defendant-Appellee, testified that the 5% fee was a tax charged by the Government of Guam, a gross receipts tax (hereinafter "GRT").}{
\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 In explaining this fee to customers, however, he depicted it as a local tax similar to a state's sales tax.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
The GRT in Guam is in fact a 4%, charge although a 5% fee was charged to customers as a reimbursement of the GRT.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Therefore, the 5% fee exceeded the GRT by 1%, which Arnold explained as a necessity since the Defendant-Appellee was paying tax on top of tax.}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [5]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab Teresa Borja was a consumer who rented a car from the Defendant-Appellee as part of the Attorney General's investigation.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Ms. Borja made a telephone reservation with the Defendant-Appellee to rent a car at a rate of $45.95 per day.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 At the time of the reservation the rental agent made no mention of the 5% fee.}{
\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 No rates were posted at the rental location.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Although the rental agreement indicated a rental rate of $45.95 per day, when Ms. Borja inquired whether this was the total cost of renting the car, she was told there would be an additional fee because of "tax."}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 When the agreement was executed, however, the only charge indicated on it was the $45.95 daily rate.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Upon returning the vehicle, Ms. Borja discovered that a 5% charge was added to the rental price.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 When Ms. Borja inquired about this charge, the agent explained it as a "surcharge or sales tax."}{
\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Further inquiry resulted in the agent explaining to Ms. Borja that the charge was "a Guam tax, a service tax, then she said it was a parking fee or tax."}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [6]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab The Defendant-Appellee claims that it was the compa
ny's practice to notify customers of this charge initially, whether on the phone or in person, when inquiries were made at the rental location.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
There were some discrepancies as to what each employee actually called the fee; however, a fact that was recognized by the Defendant-Appellee.}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [7]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab 
The Plaintiff-Appellant filed a complaint on October 29, 1993 against the Defendant-Appellee Marfega Trading Co., Inc., dba Islander Rent-A-Car and Nissan Motor Corp. alleging violations of Guam's Deceptive Trade Practic
e Act (hereinafter referred to as "Guam's DTPA").}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Nissan Motor Corp. was subsequently dismissed from this action.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The complaint alleged that during}{
\insrsid8477135  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 1991-1994 the Defendant-Appellant was charging a 5% fee above its advertised prices for car rentals, thus, advertising services with intent not to sell as advertised.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The complaint further alleged}{\insrsid8477135  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 that the charging of the 5% fee was in violation of 11 GCA }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  26115 which makes it unlawful for any entity to advertise or represent to the public that any tax levied is separate and apart from the purchase price.}{
\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The Defendant-Appellee filed a motion for summary judgment on January 30, 1995 followed by a cross-motion for similar relief filed by the Plaintiff-Appellant on March 31, 1995.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The court issued a written Decision and Order on February 5, 1997, granting summary judgment in favor of Defendant-Appellee.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
A timely notice of appeal was subsequently filed. 
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 DISCUSSION}{\b\insrsid4860763 
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8477135 {\b\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [8]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab 
This case is on appeal based on the Plaintiff-Appellant's claims that the court below erred in finding that the law and the evidence did not support a ruling of summary judgment in its favor.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Plaintiff-Appellant presents two main arguments on appeal.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 First, it contends that the Defendant-Appellant conducted false, misleading or deceptive trade practices in assessing a 5% tax that 
does not exist in violation of Guam's DPTA.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Second, Plaintiff-Appellant argues that the trial court misapplied the law based on Defendant-Appellee's representations that the 5% fee was a government levied tax in violation of 11 GCA }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  26115 and 5 GCA }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  32201(b)(29).}{\insrsid8477135 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [9]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab This Court has jurisdiction over this case pursuant to 48 U.S.C. }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt
\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  1424-3(d) and 7 GCA }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  3107(a) and 3108(a).}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The granting of summary judgment by the trial court is reviewed }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 de novo}{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 .}{\insrsid5910306  }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Iizuka Corporation v. Kawasho Int'l (GUAM) Inc.,}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  1997 Guam 10, }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 38 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 7.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Summary judgment is proper "if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party 
is entitled to judgment as a matter of law."}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 G}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 UAM}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  R. C}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 IV}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 . P. 56(c).
}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 No allegations of factual disputes have been raised by either party.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Therefore, this Court is faced with the sole task of determining whether the trial court erred as a matter of law in granting summary judgment in favor of the Defendant-Appellee.}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid8477135 I.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8477135 {\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [10]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab Guam's DTPA is found in Title 5 of the Guam Code Annotated, Division 3.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Article 2 of the DTPA addresses unlawful deceptive acts and prohibited practices.}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\widctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  32201.}{
\b\insrsid5910306  }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Deceptive Trade Practices Unlawful.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 (a)}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
False, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices, including, but not limited to those listed in this chapter, are hereby declared unlawful and are subject to action by the Attorney General or any person as permitted pursuant to this chapter or othe
r provision of Guam law.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 A violation consisting of any act prohibited by this title is in itself actionable, and may be the basis for damages, rescission, or equitable relief.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The provisions of this chapter are to be liberally construed in favor of the consumer, balanced with substantial justice, and violation of such provisions may be raised as a claim, defense, crossclaim or counterclaim.

\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\widctlpar\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 (b)}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The term }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 false}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 , }{
\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 misleading}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 , or }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 deceptive}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 acts}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  or }{
\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 practices}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  includes, but is not limited to, the following acts
 by any person or merchant, which acts are hereby prohibited and declared illegal and contrary to public policy if committed by any person or merchant . . . .
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
\par 5 GCA }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  32201.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The above code section offers a guid
eline for what constitutes deceptive unlawful trade practices; however, it is not all encompassing.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
To aid courts further in ascertaining what practices are considered to be deceptive, local law mandates that the courts look to interpretations of the "Uni
ted States Federal Trade Commission and federal courts to Section 5(c)(1) of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15 U.S.C.A. 45(a)(1)) and the Federal Trade Act."}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 5 GCA }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  32108(c)(A).}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [11]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab Case law has established a three-part test for determining whether a practice is deceptive pursuant to the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA).}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The FTC must show the following:}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 (1)}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 there is a representation, omission or practice;}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 (2) the representation, omission or practice is likely to mislead consumers acting reasonably under circumstances; and}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
(3) the representation, omission or practice must be material.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 FTC v. Patriot Alcohol Testers, Inc.}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 , 798 F.Supp. 851, 855 (D. Mass. 1992); }{
\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 FTC v. Wilcox}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 , 926 F.Supp. 1091, 1098 (S.D. Fla. 1995).}{\insrsid5910306  }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 See}{\i\insrsid5910306  }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
FTC v. Pantron I. Corp.}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 , 33 F.3d 1088, 1095 (9th Cir. 1994),}{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  cert. denied}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 , 514 U.S. 1083 (1995).}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Application of the FTC test to the facts of this case for each representation, omission or practice alleged to be misleading drives this analysis.
\par 
\par A.\tab Direct or Implied Representation, Omission or Practice}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [12]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab The Plaintiff-Appellant contends that these misleading representations were accomplished in two ways-- (1)}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Defendant-Appellee falsely represented a consumer obligation by the government to pay a 5% tax on the daily rental rate; and (2)}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Defendant-Appellee misrepresented the total cost of renting a car from itself.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
The factual basis for the contention that representations were made does not seem to be disputed except, however, the representation that the daily rate alone was the total charge for the car rental.}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [13]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab Plaintiff-Appellant argues that the Defendant-Appellee made affirmative representations that a 5% tax is levied by the government on consumers, similar to a sales tax.}{
\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Plaintiff-Appellant argues that the facts support a finding that the Defendant-Appellee represented that the 5% charge was a tax imposed by the government.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The deposition testimony of Ms. Marfega and Mr. Arnold, and Ms. Borja's affidavit indicate that Defendant-Appellee referred to the charge as "sales tax
" or GRT that is levied directly upon the consumer by the government when such is not the case.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Clearly, both parties admit that the Defendant-Appellee made the representation that there was a 5% tax charged to customers.}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [14]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab The second part of the Plaintiff-Appellant's argument is that the Defendant-Appellee misrepresented the total daily cost of renting a car.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The representation of a flat daily rate to consumers, with a 5% fee added at the time of payment, is purported to constitute a false, misleading and deceptive act on the part of the Defendant-Appellee.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The deposition testimony indicated that customers were quoted, either on the phone or in person, a daily rate of $45.95, yet what was ultimately charged was 5% over that amount.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Plaintiff-Appellant argues that customers were led to believe the rate was not in excess of $49.95 per day.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
The Defendant-Appellee argues that information about the 5% fee was not withheld from potential customers.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
However, evidence of at least one incident was presented where a customer was not initially notified of the additional fee.}{\insrsid8477135 
\par 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [15]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab The}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Defend
ant-Appellee claims that it was the company's policy to advise a customer of the charge when one initially inquired about renting a car.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
It was not upon her first inquiry, but instead when Ms. Borja went in to pick up the car and asked about whether the $45.95 rental price was the total cost, that she was told by an agent about the 5% tax.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The Defendant-Appellee disputes that it ever represented the total cost of a day}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 s rental to be $49.95.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 However, on at least one occasion this occurred.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The Borja a}{\insrsid8477135 
ffidavit establishes that much.}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8477135 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 B.\tab 
Representations Likely to Mislead Consumers Acting Reasonably Under the Circumstances}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [16]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab Adopting the Defendant-Appellee's assertion, that the Borja incident was an isolated i
ncident or at least a minimally occurring phenomena, to this part of the analysis proves unfruitful as well.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 In }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Wilcox}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
, a case where the alleged deceptive act or practice was advertising.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 926 F.Supp. at 1099. The court rejected a similar argument.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Id.}{
\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Citing yet another Federal Trade Commission (FTC) case, the }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Wilcox}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
 court demonstrated that judgment in favor of the FTC had been previously granted in a case where the defendant argued that the FTC had produced only a small sample of consumer complaints.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Id}{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 .}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The court opined:}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qj \li720\ri720\widctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin720\lin720\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
[T]he FTC need only to show that a reasonable consumer, upon hearing the advertisement, likely would be mislead [sic] to his detriment.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
In other words, the FTC is only required to show that it is likely, not that it is certain, that a reasonable consumer would be mislead [sic].}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Accordingly, the FTC does not need to show that every reasonable consumer would be mislead [sic] by the advertisements . . . .}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Indeed, advertisements are illegal if they have a "tendency" or "capacity" to deceive; actual deception of particular consumers need not be proven.}{\insrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri720\widctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin720\lin0\itap0\pararsid8477135 {\insrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Id}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 .}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Similarly, in the California case of }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 People v. Dollar Rent-A-Car Systems, Inc.}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
, 211 Cal. App.3d 119, 129 (Cal. Ct. App. 1989) the court held that actual deception is not a requirement, but merely that the public is likely to be deceived.}{\cs15\super\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\s16\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sl480\slmult1\nowidctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f63\fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid4860763 \chftn }
{\insrsid4860763 "The court may order relief 'without individualized proof of deception, reliance, and injury if it 'determines that such a remedy is necessary to prevent the use or  employment' of the unfair practice.'"  }{\i\insrsid4860763 
Dollar Rent-A-Car}{\insrsid4860763 , 211 Cal. App.3d at 129 (citations omitted).}}}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 In }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Dollar Rent-A-Car}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 ,}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 at issue was a California statute that prohibits the use of untrue or misleading statements in selling real or personal property or personal services.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Id}{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 . at 128.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The court found that Dollar misrepresented a collision damage waiver (CDW) provision}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 to limit the customer}{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 s collision liability, and found a violation of the statute.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Id}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 . at 129 The Dollar employees made untrue and confusing representations that caused customers to be misled into believing the CDW was insurance and purchasing it would li
mit their liability to a specified amount.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Id}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 . at 127.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Many of Dollar's employees were confused about the CDW, as is true in this case with the 5% fee.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The Defendant-Appellee's employees often vacillated between calling the fee a tax, sales tax, GRT or 
a service charge.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The effect of this confusion was that it misled customers, regardless of the intent of the employees or the company in general.}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [17]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab Reasonable consumers will look for the best price for any product or service, in conjunction with some requisite level of quality.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 It is misleading to inform a consumer of a surcharge, over and above an expressed flat rate, after the initial rate is relied upon.}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [18]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab Furthermore, to be told that the extra charge is a government imposed tax is also a misleading proposition.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
That Defendant-Appellee told customers that the 5% fee was a tax, like sales tax or GRT, which would cause the reasonable consumer to believe that the government requires the 5% fee in addition to the merchant's rental fee.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Although the government of Guam does levy a GRT, this is levied upon businesses based on their revenue producing activities and is not a tax on the consumer assessed at the point of sale.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The staff was instructed to inform customers that the charge was sales tax.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Inf
orming the customers that the 5% fee was sales tax, mandatorily imposed by the government upon the customer, w}{\insrsid8477135 as misleading to the customers.}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
\par 
\par C.\tab Representations Must Be Material}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [19]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab The question of materiality is not resolved by a bright line rule.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 In }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Pantron}{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 , the court}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 quickly addressed the issue of materiality by presuming that express product claims are material.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
33 F.3d at 1095-56.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 In fact, materiality may often be presumed.}{\cs15\super\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \s16\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar
\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f63\fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid4860763 \chftn }{\insrsid4860763 
"Express claims or deliberately-made implied claims used to induce the purchase of a particular product or service are presumed to be material." }{\i\insrsid4860763  Wilcox}{\insrsid4860763 , 926 F.Supp. at 1098.
\par }}}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 In this case, materiality needs to be addressed on many levels.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
First, it must be ascertained as to whether the fact that one clear case of a misleading representation being made is sufficient to warrant a punishable violation of the DTPA.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Appellee contends that this was an isolated incident with Ms. Borja and that employees were instructed to be up front about the 5% fee when customers phoned in.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 However,
 the lack of other documented incidents does not mean that other customers were not told that the charge was a tax, be that sales tax or GRT.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 This implied it was mandatorily imposed by the government.}{
\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Also, if it is not necessary for it to be demonstrate
d that several consumers were misled for a practice to be misleading, it is not necessary for it to be demonstrated that many were actually misled for a misleading practice to be considered material.}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [20]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab The second issue of materiality is whether a 5% fee over the total rental cost is material.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Five percent of $45.95 is only a couple of dollars per day.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
However, Defendant-Appellee certainly believed that it was a material amount as it felt a need to recoup the GRT that it paid out to the government for each dollar of revenue.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
To a consumer, any additional amount of money spent for a product or service is material in choosing which product or service provider to choose.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Lastly}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 is the issue of whether it was material that the customers were misled to believe that the fee was government imposed upon the customer, rather than merely the company's practice.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Leading customers to believe that the fee was a tax has widespread ramifications as well.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 As mentioned previously,}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 a}{
\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 tax}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 connotes}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 a}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 mandatory charge}{
\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 imposed}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 by}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 the}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 government.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Additionally,}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 the 
representation that this was "sales tax" created the potential for misleading the public to believe that sales tax applied to all products and services available on the island.
\par 
\par D.\tab Advertising With Intent Not To Sell As Advertised}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [21]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab Another violation of the DTPA which was alleged is that the Defendant-Appellee advertised with intent not to sell as advertised, a violation of 5 GCA }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  32201(c)(3).}{\cs15\super\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\sl480\slmult1\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid4860763 \chftn }{\fs20\insrsid4860763 Section 32201 subsection (c) states that:}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }\pard \qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 {\fs20\insrsid4860763 (c) 
The term false, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices includes, but is not limited to, the following acts committed by merchants. The following acts are hereby prohibited and declared illegal and contrary to public policy when done by any merchant:

\par (3) Advertising goods or services with intent not to sell them as advertised.   }}}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
The Plaintiff-Appellant argues that the sign board at the airport, and the phone and in-person representations of the price and the 5% tax constituted advertising.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 In additio
n to the three-part FTC test for deceptive practices, the Plaintiff-Appellant must demonstrate that the Defendant-Appellee advertised and did so with the intent not to sell as advertised.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
The Defendant-Appellee argues that no formal print or broadcast advertising was ever made.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Although there was the sign board at the airport; no newspaper, radio or television advertising was conducted.}{
\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The Plaintiff-Appellant asks the Court to construe advertising as a broad concept through which the public is informed 
of services or products, which is not limited to those traditional media mentioned above.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Citing Black}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols"
 \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 s Law Dictionary, the Defendant-Appellee proposes the following definition for advertisement: "[i]nformation
 communicated to the public, or to an individual concerned, as by handbills, newspaper, }{\insrsid8477135 television, billboards, radio."}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [22]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab The Court views the Defendant-Appellee's definition as broader than what the Defendant-Appellee may believe it to be, but it is unnecessary to resolve that dispute.}{
\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The sign board is analogous to a billboard, albeit on a smaller scale.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Even applying the 
definition which the Appellee espouses, the public display of the sign board is still advertising.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8477135 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid8477135 II.
\par }\pard \ql \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8477135 {\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [23]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab 
The second issue is whether the trial court misapplied the law in concluding that the Defendant-Appellee's}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 representation}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 that}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 the}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 5%}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 fee}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 was}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
a}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 government}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 levied}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 tax}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 was not in}{
\insrsid8477135  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 violation of 11 GCA }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  26115.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Section 26115 makes it unlawful for any taxpayer to hold out to the public that any tax levied is not part of the purchase price.}{\cs15\super\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain 
\s16\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \f63\fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid4860763 \chftn }{
\insrsid4860763 11 GCA }{\insrsid4860763 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f169\fs20}}}{\insrsid4860763  26115 provides in relevant part:
\par }\pard\plain \ql \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\f63\fs20\insrsid4860763 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\sl480\slmult1\nowidctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0 {\f63\fs20\insrsid4860763 
It shall be unlawful for any taxpayer under this Chapter [26 Business Privilege Tax] to advertise, or hold out to the public in any manner, directly or indirectly, that any tax levied hereunder is not considered as an element of the purchase price. }{
\f63\insrsid4860763 
\par }}}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Also argued is a violation of 5 GCA }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
 33201(b)(29)}{\cs15\super\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \chftn {\footnote \pard\plain \s16\qj \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 
\f63\fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\cs15\super\insrsid4860763 \chftn }{\super\insrsid4860763  }{\insrsid4860763 5 GCA }{\insrsid4860763 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 10}{\fldrslt\f169\fs20}}}{
\insrsid4860763  32201 5(b)(29) provides:
\par }\pard\plain \ql \fi720\li0\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0 \fs24\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\f63\fs20\insrsid4860763 
\par }\pard \ql \li720\ri0\nowidctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin720\itap0 {\f63\fs20\insrsid4860763 
(b) The term false, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices includes, but is not limited to, the following  acts by any person or merchant, which acts are hereby prohibited and declared i
llegal and contrary to public policy if committed by any person or merchant:
\par }\pard\plain \s16\qj \li1440\ri720\nowidctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin720\lin1440\itap0 \f63\fs20\lang1033\langfe1033\cgrid\langnp1033\langfenp1033 {\insrsid4860763 
(29) Doing any other act which is prohibited by the laws of Guam to mislead a consumer to his detriment or to induce another person to buy or sell goods or services to such person's detriment.
\par }}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  that prohibits businesses from performing deceptive acts or practices that mislead a consumer to his detriment.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
The question becomes whether charging a 5% fee over the purchase or rental price is a misrepresentation that leads to the consumer's detriment.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
We find this practice to be misleading because it represents that the tax is above the purchase price, rather than an element of the purchase price.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Once again, the affidavit of Ms. Borja, who signed the rental contract for a rental price of $45.95/day, demonstrated that she believed this to be the only charge she owed.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
However, when she returned the car, Ms. Borja discovered the addition of the 5% charge which was explained to her as a service tax or GRT.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
To tell a customer that the charge is GRT leads the customer to believe that payment of this tax is imposed directly on the consumer by the government, in violation of 11 GCA }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  26115 and 5 GCA }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid8477135  32201(b)(29).}
{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [24]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab Additionally, a misrepresentation could be found in the sign board at the airport which identified a }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 65 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 5% tax}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 64 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
 (from 1991-1992) and a "5% service charge", which was explained as "like a sales tax", (from 1992-1994).}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
The Plaintiff-Appellant contends that the sign represented to consumers that the tax or service charge was not part of the purchase price, but instead appeared to be an additional charge over the purchase price.}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [25]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab The Defendant-Appellee claims that its practice and representations were not misleading based on Op. Att}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f 
"WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 y Gen. 84-01 (1983) that it claims stands for the proposition that there is nothing wrong with including information as to the amount of GRT collected.}{\insrsid5910306 
 }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Attorney General}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 61 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 s opinions 
are to be accorded substantial weight, although not controlling on courts.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Mountain View Union High}{\i\insrsid5910306  }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 School}{\i\insrsid5910306  }{
\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Dist. v.}{\i\insrsid5910306  }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 City}{\i\insrsid5910306  }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Council}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 , 168 Cal. App. 2d}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 89,}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 335 P.2d 957, 960-61 n.2}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 (Cal. Ct. App. 
1959) (holding that an attorney general's opinion as to statutory construction could be a factor considered by the court in applying a statute); }{\i\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Prescott v. U.S.}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 , 731 F.2d 1388, 1393 (9
}{\super\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 th}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  Cir. 1984) (holding that attorney general opinions should be given great weight).}{\insrsid4860763 
\par }{\insrsid8477135\charrsid5910306 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [26]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab The Attorney General Opinion addressed the question of whether it is "unl
awful for a merchant to designate the amount of gross receipts tax arising from a sale of goods or services on an invoice, bill, sales slip, price tag or other document relating to the sale."}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
What the Attorney General opined was that it was lawful to incl
ude such information provided that "no additional language is inserted, or verbal representations made, which state or imply that the gross receipts tax is not being passed on to the customers as part of the purchase price."}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The Appellee could therefore include information about the GRT, so long as it made no representations that it was not part of the purchase price.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Appellee argues that this supports its proposition.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 However, it would seem that the manner in which Appellee referred to the fee, as a "ta
x" and then followed up by explaining to customers that it was like sales tax, would imply that it was not part of the purchase price.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Instead, it was represented as an additional charge over the purchase price, and a government mandated charge at that.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
Appellee relies on the Attorney General Opinion, but seems to misconstrue its holding and/or the facts at hand.
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 CONCLUSION}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qj \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid8477135\charrsid8477135 
\par }{\b\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 [27]}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 \tab After applying the FTC test to the Defendant-Appellee's practices and representations, we conclude}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 that}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 the}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Defendant-Appellee}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 has}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 violated}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Guam's}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 DTPA.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Defendant-Appellee}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 made material represent
ations that were potentially, if not actually, misleading to customers.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
In light of the intent of the DPTA, the Court, after balancing all interests involved, chooses to liberally construe the applicable code sections in favor of the consumer.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 As to the 
second issue of a violation of 11 GCA }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 {\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  26115 and 5 GCA }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
{\field{\*\fldinst SYMBOL 39 \\f "WP TypographicSymbols" \\s 12}{\fldrslt\f169\fs24}}}{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306  32201(b)(29), it is clear in this situation that the Defendant-Appellee}{\insrsid8477135  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 
misrepresented the inclusion of the GRT as part of the purchase price and, further, misrepresented}{\insrsid8477135  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 it as a tax above the purchase price which was imposed by the government.}{\insrsid5910306  }{
\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 The overall message of the Attorney General Opinion is that if additional language indicates that the GRT is not being passed on to the consumer as part of the purchase price it is a violation of Section 26115.}{
\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 This is what occurred in this situation.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Therefore, we hereby reverse the trial court's decision and grant summary judgment i
n favor of the Plaintiff-Appellant.}{\insrsid5910306  }{\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 Reversed and Remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.}{\insrsid5910306 
\par 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8477135 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 BENJAMIN J. F. CRUZ, Associate Justice\tab  \tab 
JANET HEALY WEEKS, Associate Justice}{\insrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \ql \fi-5040\li5040\ri0\widctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin5040\itap0\pararsid5910306 {\insrsid5910306 
\par }\pard \qc \li0\ri0\widctlpar\tx0\tx720\tx1440\tx2160\tx2880\tx3600\tx4320\tx5040\tx5760\tx6480\tx7200\tx7920\tx8640\faauto\rin0\lin0\itap0\pararsid8477135 {\insrsid4860763\charrsid5910306 PETER C. SIGUENZA, Chief Justice
\par }}