Sweazy v. Commonwealth

How courts have described this case

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

• dismissing complaint where product listed expensive ingredients on front label but cheaper ingredients predominated
• finding “any potential ambiguity” created by pictured ingredients on food packaging “could be resolved by the back panel of the products, which listed all ingredients in order of predominance, as required by the FDA”
• allegation that the packaging was misleading for implying that the pictured ingredients were the most prominent
• allegation that the packaging was misleading for implying that the 12 17-2011 Mantikas, et al. v. Kellogg Company 1 pictured ingredients were the most prominent
• “[A]ny potential ambiguity could be resolved by the back panel of the products, which listed all ingredients in order of predominance, as required by the FDA.”
• “Every reasonable shopper knows that the devil is in the details.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).