Edward F. Flanagan v. Nancy duMont (Flanagan)

How courts have described this case

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

• reversing dismissal of state-law claim that food label’s claim of “zero trans fat” was deceptive where federal regulations did not expressly au- thorize that claim outside fine-print list of nutritional facts
• reversing dismissal of state-law claim that food label’s claim of “zero trans fat” was deceptive where federal regulations did not expressly au- thorize that claim outside fine-print list of nutritional facts
• discussing Reid v. Johnson & 6 Johnson,780 F.3d 952 (9th Cir. 2015)
• “[I]t is sufficient for a consumer to allege that she bought 23 a product she would not have otherwise bought if she had known the product was harmful.”
• “The NLEA . . . provides that no 8 state may directly or indirectly establish any requirement for the labeling of food that is not 9 identical to the federal requirements.”
• “Because [the plaintiff] adequately alleged that she relied on the label’s 27 misrepresentations and would not have purchased the product without those 28 misrepresentations, she has adequately alleged standing for her labeling claim.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).