Matter of Rodriguez v. Hobbs

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the Labeling Act did not preempt a state law claim that the tobacco companies’ advertising was fraudulent
• recognizing that “the purpose of Congress is the ultimate touchstone in every pre-emption case” (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted)
• holding that the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act did not preempt plaintiffs’ state law claims
• holding that the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act did not preempt a state law fraud claim
• holding that the federal Labeling Act did not expressly preempt plaintiffs’ claims under the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act alleging that Altria’s advertising of light cigarettes was fraudulent
• holding that the federal Labeling Act did not expressly preempt plaintiffs' claims under the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act alleging that Altria's advertising of light cigarettes was fraudulent

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).