§Why CasetextPricing

Wilson v. Frito-Lay North America, Inc. et al

RESPONSE

40 Cited authorities

  1. Vess v. Ciba-Geigy Corp. USA

    317 F.3d 1097 (9th Cir. 2003)   Cited 4,325 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Rule 9(b) pleading standards apply to California CLRA, FAL, and UCL claims because, though fraud is not an essential element of those statutes, a plaintiff alleges a fraudulent course of conduct as the basis of those claims

  2. Kwikset Corp. v. Superior Court

    51 Cal.4th 310 (Cal. 2011)   Cited 1,604 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the standards for establishing standing under section 17204 and eligibility for restitution under section 17203 are wholly distinct"

  3. Reyn's Pasta Bella, LLC v. Visa USA, Inc.

    442 F.3d 741 (9th Cir. 2006)   Cited 1,608 times
    Holding that the district court's "approval of the settlement constituted a final judgment on the merits"

  4. Kasky v. Nike

    27 Cal.4th 939 (Cal. 2002)   Cited 679 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that statements by the defendant about the working conditions of its overseas employees were not protected by the First Amendment and could give rise to a claim for fraudulent business practices under the UCL

  5. Saunders v. Superior Court

    27 Cal.App.4th 832 (Cal. Ct. App. 1994)   Cited 549 times
    Finding that aiding and abetting requires actual knowledge

  6. Committee on Children's Television, Inc. v. General Foods Corp.

    35 Cal.3d 197 (Cal. 1983)   Cited 717 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that no fiduciary relationship existed between advertisers of cereal and consumers because "it is unnecessary to call upon the law of fiduciary relationships to perform a function for which it was not designed and is largely unsuited"

  7. American Farm Bureau v. U.S.E.P.A

    121 F. Supp. 2d 84 (D.D.C. 2000)   Cited 186 times
    Denying plaintiff's assertion of informational standing based on a Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act because that statute “does not confer a broad, legally enforceable right to information”

  8. Appalachian Power Co. v. E.P.A

    208 F.3d 1015 (D.C. Cir. 2000)   Cited 175 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an EPA guidance document had "legal consequences" because the agency "has given the States their `marching orders'"

  9. Jones v. Conagra Foods, Inc.

    912 F. Supp. 2d 889 (N.D. Cal. 2012)   Cited 96 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding allegation that plaintiffs would not have purchased a product if the product had been labeled accurately is sufficient to establish injury under California's consumer laws

  10. Bassiri v. Xerox Corp.

    463 F.3d 927 (9th Cir. 2006)   Cited 105 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding DOL opinion letter was entitled to "great judicial deference"

  11. Rule 9 - Pleading Special Matters

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 9   Cited 39,914 times   332 Legal Analyses
    Requiring that fraud be pleaded with particularity

  12. Section 17200 - Unfair competition defined

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200   Cited 18,278 times   315 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting unlawful business practices

  13. Section 2301 - Definitions

    15 U.S.C. § 2301   Cited 2,566 times   36 Legal Analyses
    Including as consumers those entitled to enforce a warranty "under applicable State law"

  14. Section 17500 - Untrue or misleading advertising

    Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17500   Cited 2,746 times   65 Legal Analyses
    Requiring action that originated in California to effect consumers in another state

  15. Section 301 - Short title

    21 U.S.C. § 301   Cited 2,461 times   48 Legal Analyses

    This chapter may be cited as the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. 21 U.S.C. § 301 June 25, 1938, ch. 675, §1, 52 Stat. 1040. STATUTORY NOTES AND RELATED SUBSIDIARIES EFFECTIVE DATE; POSTPONEMENT IN CERTAIN CASES Act June 23, 1939, ch. 242, §§1, 2, 53 Stat. 853, 854, provided that:"[SEC. 1] (a) The effective date of the following provisions of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act is hereby postponed until January 1, 1940: Sections 402(c) [342(c) of this title]; 403(e)(1) [343(e)(1) of this

  16. Section 321 - Definitions; generally

    21 U.S.C. § 321   Cited 1,177 times   170 Legal Analyses
    Defining “new drug”

  17. Section 1790 - Title of act

    Cal. Civ. Code § 1790   Cited 737 times   6 Legal Analyses

    This chapter may be cited as the "Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act." Ca. Civ. Code § 1790 Added by Stats. 1970, Ch. 1333.

  18. Section 343 - Misbranded food

    21 U.S.C. § 343   Cited 584 times   60 Legal Analyses
    Setting labeling requirements for food products

  19. Section 109875 - Short title

    Cal. Health & Saf. Code § 109875   Cited 101 times   6 Legal Analyses

    This part shall be known as the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law. Ca. Health and Saf. Code § 109875 Added by Stats. 1995, Ch. 415, Sec. 6. Effective January 1, 1996.

  20. Section 110660 - Misbranded food

    Cal. Health & Saf. Code § 110660   Cited 39 times

    Any food is misbranded if its labeling is false or misleading in any particular. Ca. Health and Saf. Code § 110660 Added by Stats. 1995, Ch. 415, Sec. 6. Effective January 1, 1996.

  21. Section 101.13 - Nutrient content claims-general principles

    21 C.F.R. § 101.13   Cited 171 times   11 Legal Analyses
    In 21 C.F.R. § 101.13, the FDA lists general principles regulating nutrient content claims-claims that expressly or implicitly characterize the level of a nutrient.

  22. Section 101.22 - Foods; labeling of spices, flavorings, colorings and chemical preservatives

    21 C.F.R. § 101.22   Cited 136 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Using vanilla as an example of a "characterizing flavor"

  23. Section 101.65 - Implied nutrient content claims and related label statements

    21 C.F.R. § 101.65   Cited 44 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Defining nutrient content claim

  24. Section 1.21 - Failure to reveal material facts

    21 C.F.R. § 1.21   Cited 28 times   2 Legal Analyses

    (a) Labeling of a food, drug, device, cosmetic, or tobacco product shall be deemed to be misleading if it fails to reveal facts that are: (1) Material in light of other representations made or suggested by statement, word, design, device or any combination thereof; or (2) Material with respect to consequences which may result from use of the article under: (i) The conditions prescribed in such labeling or (ii) such conditions of use as are customary or usual. (b) Affirmative disclosure of material

  25. Section 101.61 - Nutrient content claims for the sodium content of foods

    21 C.F.R. § 101.61   Cited 4 times

    (a)General requirements. A claim about the level of sodium or salt in a food may only be made on the label or in the labeling of the food if: (1) The claim uses one of the terms defined in this section in accordance with the definition for that term; (2) The claim is made in accordance with the general requirements for nutrient content claims in § 101.13 ; and (3) The food for which the claim is made is labeled in accordance with § 101.9 , § 101.10 , or § 101.36 , as applicable. (b)Sodium content