Recent Posts
- Octuplets mom Nadya Suleman settles her workers’ comp case
- Lawsuit alleges UMC misclassified patients, overcharged millions
- Stabbing victim files civil suit against family
- Potentially deadly ice cream recalled
- Fatal I-75 crash in 2009 spawns lawsuit against Collier teacher
- Spencer Reed Group to Settle EEOC Race and Age Discrimination Lawsuit
- Sickened September 11 workers get revised settlement
- Metro sports giants clash in court
- Wrongful death lawsuit filed against 4 New Orleans cops in Henry Glover case
- Starwatch consumer | BMW, VW issue recalls
- Wrigley Settles False-Ad Class Action For $6M
- New sex abuse suit filed against Los Angeles Archdiocese
- Police, fire unions sue Baltimore over pensions
- Woman falls asleep on United flight, wakes up alone after plane lands
- Carradine’s wife sues film company
Archived Posts
- June 2010 (39)
- May 2010 (27)
- April 2010 (57)
- March 2010 (168)
- February 2010 (144)
- January 2010 (119)
- December 2009 (8)
- November 2009 (165)
- October 2009 (1)
- June 2009 (29)
- April 2009 (61)
- March 2009 (140)
- February 2009 (156)
- January 2009 (151)
- December 2008 (143)
- November 2008 (113)
- October 2008 (192)
- September 2008 (88)
- August 2008 (8)
- July 2008 (29)
Blogroll
Pages
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| « Jun | ||||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | |||
Meta
Class-action lawsuit over tobacco ads proceeds
June 5, 2009
Consumers have the right to sue as a group over advertising they believe misled them into buying products, a divided state Supreme Court ruled Monday in reinstating a massive suit against the tobacco industry.
The 4-3 decision rejected business arguments that, if accepted, would have virtually prohibited class-action suits for false advertising by requiring proof that every plaintiff - millions of them, in some cases - had seen an allegedly deceptive ad and relied on it to make a purchase. The court majority said that evidence is required only for the single plaintiff or small group that represents the entire class.
“This gives the consumers rights to protect themselves from fraudulent advertising,” said Mark Robinson, a lawyer for the smokers who sued tobacco companies in 1997.
The ruling could make California “the class-action capital of the country,” retorted William Stern, a lawyer for business organizations and a co-author of Proposition 64, a 2004 ballot measure at the heart of the case.
Read Article: San Francisco Chronicle
Posted By: Phoenix DUI Attorney
No Comments »
No comments yet.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL