A recent decision by the California Supreme Court underscores why courts should be hesitant to grant class certification in cases in which the learned intermediary doctrine applies. Continue Reading California Supreme Court Decision Highlights Potential Class Certification Defenses for Manufacturers of Prescription Drugs & Medical Devices
Court Dismisses Lawsuits Alleging Presence of PFAS in Tampon Products
A California district court recently dismissed two lawsuits that asserted that the marketing of certain tampons was misleading due to the alleged presence of per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (“PFAS”), holding that plaintiffs could not rely on conclusory assertions regarding testing that allegedly detected PFAS in the products.Continue Reading Court Dismisses Lawsuits Alleging Presence of PFAS in Tampon Products
A Closer Look: Second Circuit Steps In to Reverse Decision Refusing To Enforce “Click-Wrap” Mandatory Arbitration Agreement
On November 3, the Second Circuit reversed a lower court decision denying a motion to compel arbitration in a putative class action against Klarna. See Edmundson v. Klarna, Inc., 85 F.4th 695 (2d Cir. 2023). The decision offers guidance (and support) for companies looking to enforce similar “click-wrap” agreements with mandatory arbitration provisions.Continue Reading A Closer Look: Second Circuit Steps In to Reverse Decision Refusing To Enforce “Click-Wrap” Mandatory Arbitration Agreement
Aspirational Statements of “Sustainability” Not Actionable Under D.C. Consumer Protection Statute
As plaintiffs continue to rely on the District of Columbia Consumer Protection Procedures Act (“CPPA”) to bring greenwashing suits, a recent D.C. Superior Court decision imposes limits on their ability to allege that a company’s general commitments to “sustainability” can constitute actionable misrepresentations.Continue Reading Aspirational Statements of “Sustainability” Not Actionable Under D.C. Consumer Protection Statute
A Closer Look: D.C. Court of Appeals Endorses Broad Organizational Standing to Bring Consumer Protection Lawsuits
We previously reported on a surge of mislabeling suits filed in District of Columbia Superior Court, following lower court decisions that purported to grant “tester” plaintiffs—individuals and organizations that purchase products simply to test whether the representations about a product are true—a right to sue on behalf of the general public under the District of Columbia Consumer Protection Procedures Act (“CPPA”). A year later, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals has endorsed an even more expansive interpretation of the CPPA, permitting a public interest organization to bring such actions even if the organization fails to satisfy Article III’s standing requirements. We expect even more lawsuits to be filed in the wake of this decision.Continue Reading A Closer Look: D.C. Court of Appeals Endorses Broad Organizational Standing to Bring Consumer Protection Lawsuits