Hutson v. Rexall Sundown, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the 11 FDUTPA did not protect nonresident customers of products sourced from Florida
• holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it concluded that the plaintiffs failed to satisfy typicality because the proposed class included customers who could not claim any injury or damage
• affirming denial of certification of unjust enrichment claim for alleged deceptive labeling and point-of-purchase advertising for calcium supplements because of predominance of individualized fact issues
• affirming denial of certification of unjust enrichment claim for alleged deceptive labeling and point-of-purchase advertising for calcium supplements because of predominance of individualized fact issues
• affirming refusal to certify nationwide class in Florida Decep tive and Unfair Trade Practices Act suit against manufacturer of calcium supplements where injury occurred at points of sale outside Florida
• affirming trial court’s conclusion that “the claims of non-resident consumers would require the application of consumer protection laws from each of the states where the deceptive trade practice occurred and the non-resident claimants suffered injury.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).