1. The court found that the defendant had violated the state cooling-off statute such that the plaintiff was permitted to cancel the contract one month after the sale had occurred. What should the defendant have done differently to have avoided this result?
2. The court also found that the defendant’s actions violated the state’s statute prohibiting deceptive business practices. Which actions of the defendant were deceptive?
3. What does the plaintiff ultimately recover? The court seems to feel that this amount is inadequate yet states that it is unable to award more to the plaintiff. Why?

The plaintiff, soon to be a new bride, attended the Great Bridal Expo. * * * Amongst the many exhibitors was the defendant, 21st Century Concepts, Inc. doing business as Royal Prestige (“Royal Prestige”). Royal Prestige, a direct marketing company, displayed a variety of knives, china, glassware, water filters and cookware. * * *