Rhone-Poulenc Rorer Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Marion Merrell Dow, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that an advertisement can be literally false if it falsely represents that the product has certain qualities that it does not actually have
• recognizing different \stan- dards\ of proof for the two types of advertising claims
• approving corrective advertising as a method of injunctive relief to counter defendant’s false advertising relating to the capabilities of plaintiffs drug
• vacating a portion of a “permanent injunction” because it “violate[d] Rule 65(d)”
• vacating a portion of a “permanent injunction” because it “violate[d] Rule 65(d)”
• corrective advertising appropriate where advertisements falsely represented that two prescription medications could be indiscriminately substituted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).