ORANGE COUNTY, Calif., May 13, 2026 /PRNewswire/ -- Protectus Law and Graham & Associates LLP, the source law firms representing California resident Bruce Puterbaugh, announce a groundbreaking ruling with nationwide implications for charitable fundraising practices. Following a full trial on the merits in Puterbaugh v. Oorah, Inc. and Kars4Kids, Judge Apkarian of the Superior Court of California, County of Orange, found that Kars4Kids violated California's False Advertising Law and Unfair Competition Law by intentionally misleading donors through its deceptive "1-877-Kars4Kids" advertising jingle.

Protectus Law and Graham & Associates LLP brought the lawsuit under the California False Advertising and Unfair Competition laws on behalf of Mr. Puterbaugh, a California cabinet maker in his 70s. In 2021, he donated a vehicle after repeatedly hearing the jingle, believing the charity broadly benefited underprivileged children across the U.S., including California, because the ads mentioned no geographic or religious limitations.

In the final order issued on May 8, 2026, the Court ruled that Kars4Kids' actions constituted an "actionable strategy of deception". The Court found that 60% of the funds go to Oorah, supporting Orthodox Jewish programs primarily in New York, New Jersey, and the Middle East, with no geographic nexus to California. Under cross-examination, Kars4Kids' COO admitted the organization's primary purpose is to help "Jewish kids and families throughout their lives." The Court cited evidence that funds supported adult and family programs – including matchmaking services, "gap year" trips for 17- and 18-year-olds, and a $16.5 million real estate acquisition in Israel – which contradicts the "needy child" persona cultivated by the ad.

Judge Apkarian noted that broadcasting the jingle is fraudulent because it relies on "false assumptions created by the Defendant's calculated silence". The Court rejected Kars4Kids' argument that the First Amendment protected their omissions, holding that fraudulent omissions are not shielded by free expression. Furthermore, the Court rejected the defense that consumers should independently research the charity online before donating, ruling that the deception occurs the moment donors respond to the broadcast solicitation.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/protectus-law-announces-landmark-california-court-ruling-against-kars4kids-for-false-advertising-and-unlawful-business-practices-302770344.html

Did you get what you voted for, Trumpkin?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866332&forum_id=2...id.#49883540)

someone needs to send judge apkarian a video of fiveish

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5866332&forum_id=2...id.#49883961)