legal news


Register | Forgot Password

PFIZER INC v. SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY

PFIZER INC v. SUPERIOR COURT OF LOS ANGELES COUNTY
07:17:2006

PFIZER INC v. SUPERIOR COURT OF


LOS ANGELES COUNTY






Filed 7/11/06





CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION


IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA




SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT





DIVISION THREE











PFIZER INC.,


Petitioner,


v.


SUPERIOR COURT OF


LOS ANGELES COUNTY,


Respondent;


STEVE GALFANO,


Real Party in Interest.



B188106


(Los Angeles County


Super. Ct. No. BC327114)



ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS in mandate. Carl J. West, Judge. Petition granted.


Kaye Scholer, Thomas A. Smart, Richard A. De Sevo and Jeffrey S. Gordon for Petitioner.


Hugh F. Young, Jr.; Shook, Hardy & Bacon, Paul B. La Scala, Victor E. Schwartz, Cary Silverman, for Product Liability Advisory Council, Inc. as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Petitioner.


Fred J. Hiestand; Morrison & Foerster, William L. Stern, for Civil Justice Association of California, California Chamber of Commerce, California Manufacturers and Technology Association and California Bankers Association, as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioner.


National Chamber Litigation Center Inc., Robin S. Conrad; Wiley Rein & Fielding, John E. Barry for the Chamber of Commerce of the United States of America, the Association of National Advertisers, Inc., and the Coalition for Healthcare Communications as Amici Curiae on behalf of Petitioner.


No appearance for Respondent.


Westrup Klick, R. Duane Westrup, Christine C. Choi; Allan A. Sigel for Real Party in Interest.


Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Tom Greene, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Albert Norman Shelden, Assistant Attorney General, Ronald A. Reiter and Kathrin Sears, Deputy Attorneys General, as Amicus Curiae.


Defendant Pfizer, Inc. (Pfizer), the manufacturer of Listerine mouthwash, seeks a writ of mandate to overturn respondent superior court's November 22, 2005 order certifying a class action filed by plaintiff and real party in interest Steve Galfano (Galfano). The complaint alleges Pfizer marketed Listerine in a misleading manner by indicating the use of Listerine can replace the use of dental floss in reducing plaque and gingivitis.


The trial court certified a class of â€





Description Proposition 64 restrictions on private enforcement of unfair competition and false advertising law require that plaintiff must have relied on allegedly false or misleading misrepresentation or advertisement in entering into transaction, so trial court erred in certifying overbroad class made up of all persons who purchased particular product during applicable time period.
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2024 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2024 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale