We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 28

First Circuit upholds $48 million award for deceptive infomercials promoting dietary supplements

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 28 2010

The First Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a multi-million dollar award in the Federal Trade Commission's (FTC's) lawsuit against the producer and distributor of infomercials for dietary supplements that could purportedly cure everything from cancer, obesity and Parkinson's disease to multiple sclerosis, heart disease and lupus

Federal court denies class certification request in ''made in the USA'' tools case

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 5 2012

In the last remaining case of multidistrict litigation alleging that Sears, Roebuck & Co. misled consumers by advertising its line of Craftsman tools, now mostly made abroad, as manufactured in the United States, a federal court has dismissed a count brought under federal warranty law and denied the plaintiff’s motion to certify a statewide class of claimants

SCOTUS grants cert. on Lanham Act standing for false advertising claims

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 13 2013

The U.S. Supreme Court has decided to review whether an entity may bring a claim for false advertising under the Lanham Act against a defendant that

FDA warning letter followed by consumer fraud lawsuits against mouthwash manufacturer

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 14 2010

Immediately after the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning letter to Johnson & Johnson Consumer Products, Inc. to challenge the company’s promotion of Listerine Total Care Anticavity Mouthwash as an anti-plaque product, putative class actions alleging consumer fraud were filed against the company in California and Florida

Putative class challenges “Super Stay” lipstick advertising claims

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 11 2012

Plaintiffs from three states have filed a putative class action against Maybelline, LLC, alleging that the company’s marketing and promotions highlighting the long-lasting qualities of its lipstick are misleading, inaccurate and deceptive

Tweeting jurors could go to jail in California

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 11 2011

California Governor Jerry Brown (D) has signed a law (A.B. 141) that makes it a misdemeanor for a juror to willfully disobey “a court admonishment related to the prohibition on any form of communication or research about the case, including all forms of electronic or wireless communication or research."

Court rejects FTC allegations that dietary supplement maker violated consent decree

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 8 2012

According to a news source, a company that makes dietary supplements has prevailed before a federal court considering claims filed by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) alleging that the company violated a 2006 consent decree

Eleventh Circuit changes its interpretation of Class Action Fairness Act

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 28 2010

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals has determined on rehearing that it erred by interpreting the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) as requiring at least one plaintiff in a class action to meet the amount-in-controversy requirement for diversity jurisdiction

Seventh Circuit denies writ seeking recusal of judge who authored article on lead paint case

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 24 2010

The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has denied a paint manufacturer's request that it order the recusal of a federal district court judge who co-authored a law review article commenting favorably on a Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling allowing plaintiffs to sue the makers of lead-based paint for injuries allegedly caused by exposure to lead under a risk-contribution theory where the specific manufacturer cannot be identified

Athletic Shoe dispute returns to state court

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 28 2011

Addressing a question of first impression, a federal court in Arkansas has determined that a plaintiff met her burden of establishing that damages in her putative class action would not exceed the amount-in-controversy requirement of $5 million for diversity jurisdiction and, thus, that her case must be remanded to and tried in state court