Com. Ex Rel. Blattenberger v. Ashe, Warden

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that plaintiff who alleged that cake mix was not “all natural” as represented had stated an MMPA claim under the benefit-of-the-bargain rule because the mix allegedly “was worth less than the product as represented”
• explaining that “ascertainable loss” under the Missouri consumer-fraud statute is assessed “under the benefit-of-the-bargain rule, which compares the actual value of the item to the value of the item if it had been as represented at the time of the transaction”
• requiring the plaintiff’s injury to occur “as a result of” a vio- lation of the statute
• noting a reasonable consumer’s understanding of whether a practice is unfair or deceptive is a question of fact
• declining to decide how a \reasonable consumer\ would perceive the term \all natural\ at an early stage of litigation, and holding that the question is appropriately addressed on a motion for summary judgment or trial
• declining to decide how a “reasonable consumer” would perceive the term “all natural” at an early stage of litigation, and holding that the question is appropriately addressed on a motion for summary judgment or trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).