Search for: "Zale v. Zale"
Results 21 - 40
of 82
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Jan 2012, 10:17 am
Consumers shopping for cat litter overwhelmingly identified baking soda with C & D’s Arm & Hammer cat litter products, according to the court.The court concluded that the comparisons were at least as direct as those in Time Warner Cable, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Jan 2012, 3:36 pm
The January 18, 2012 opinion in Mims v. [read post]
2 Dec 2011, 9:36 am
This posting was written by William Zale, Editor of CCH Advertising Law Guide.Consumers could not pursue deceptive advertising claims against providers of a health care discount program as a class action because the claims were governed by the varying consumer protection laws of different states and factual variations abounded, included varying advertisements in different states, the U.S. [read post]
1 Dec 2011, 7:47 am
In that that regard, I adopt the reasoning of Harvey J. in Zale v. [read post]
14 Nov 2011, 9:30 am
Ferguson v. [read post]
24 Oct 2011, 8:38 am
The allegations of ascertainable loss were unsupported conclusory statements insufficient to withstand a motion to dismiss, the court determined.The purchaser’s claims were dismissed without prejudice because it was conceivable that she could plead ascertainable loss with specificity, the court said.The opinion in Lieberson v. [read post]
13 Oct 2011, 4:20 pm
However, following the Unique Product Solutions decision, several other courts had rejected constitutional challenges (citations collected in Champion Laboratories, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Sep 2011, 8:50 am
Supreme Court’s decision in Wal-Mart v. [read post]
22 Sep 2011, 8:02 am
The Rogers test had been applied in cases when the appropriation of a celebrity likeness created a false and misleading impression that the celebrity was endorsing a product.As explained in Seale v. [read post]
30 Aug 2011, 1:27 pm
The statute did not state that the threat of class action must be set forth, according to the court.Dismissal of the CLRA claims was affirmed in two of the actions on appeal in which the proposed class of ticket purchasers was so broadly defined that material misrepresentations to the whole class could not be shown.The August 22 opinion in Stearns v. [read post]
10 Aug 2011, 11:43 am
Labeling Puerto Rican Rum as “Havana Club” Not False AdvertisingThis posting was written by William Zale, Editor of CCH Advertising Law Guide.A liquor distributor (Bacardi U.S.A.) did not engage in false advertising under the Lanham Act by labeling a rum not produced in Cuba as “Havana Club,” the U.S. [read post]
21 Jun 2011, 8:25 am
In Koh, a household cleaning product label made express representations of environmental superiority, used the trademarked name “Greenlist,” a name not immediately apt to be associated with the product or its manufacturers, and identified the name as a rating system, which further suggested an independent source that rated other manufacturers’ products as well.The May 26 opinion in Hill v. [read post]
15 Jun 2011, 9:18 am
Claims under the New York deceptive acts and practices statute were rejected because none of the plaintiffs took classes in New York.PufferyThe court agreed with Trump’s contention that his alleged statement “no course offers the same depth of insight, experience and support as the one bearing my name” constituted mere puffery and thus could not support claims under the UCL or CLRA.The May 16 opinions in Makaeff v. [read post]
6 Jun 2011, 7:13 pm
” Mead Johnson was held to have engaged in false advertising in this case, and it did not dispute that it had distributed false statements about PBM's formulas on prior occasions, the court observed.The decision is PBM Products, LLC v. [read post]
16 May 2011, 11:51 am
Supreme Court in Morrison v. [read post]
27 Apr 2011, 6:56 pm
” The appeals court had held that the class action waiver in the wireless service agreement was unconscionable under the law of California.In Discover Bank v. [read post]
26 Apr 2011, 8:04 am
The opinion in Smajlaj v. [read post]
24 Mar 2011, 8:43 am
Johnson’s contention, the suit was not about the consumer's general purchasing habits.The February 18 opinion in Koh v. [read post]
10 Mar 2011, 1:16 pm
The purchaser alleged that the class would include thousands of individuals who purchased the product throughout the United States.The February 24 opinion in Peviani v. [read post]
8 Mar 2011, 12:10 pm
Huggins Realty, Inc. v. [read post]
