State ex rel. Ribet v. Judge of the Third District Court

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that plaintiffs had standing if they pled a future desire to buy defendant’s product
• noting that the only Second Circuit summary order on point found no standing because plaintiff stated he would not purchase the product again
• finding that product’s name “Cranberry Apple” misled consumers into believing that the dominant ingredient was Cranberry
• concluding on 12(b)(6) motion that “cold- pressed” label on juice bottle could not plausibly lead reasonable consumer to assume juice had not also undergone additional processes
• dismissing the plaintiff's GBL claims where \[t]here is no 'only' or 'exclusively' modifier before 'cold-pressed' to indicate that the juice has been subjected to no other process\
• dismissing false ad- vertising claim because a reasonable consumer would not expect that juice labeled as “cold-pressed” was only cold-pressed, and not subject to any other preparation processes

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).