Legal Opinion
Federal Trade Commission v. Bronson Partners, LLC
District Court, D. Connecticut
Decided December 4, 2009No. Civil Action 3:04cv1866 (SRU)PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RULING AND ORDER
STEFAN R. UNDERHILL, District Judge.
The Federal Trade Commission (“Commission”) brought this enforcement action challenging as false advertising the claims that the defendants, Bronson Partners, LLC (“Bronson”) and Martin Howard (collectively “defendants”) made in their advertisements for two products: Chinese Diet Tea (“Diet Tea”) and the Bio-Slim Patch (“Patch”). On July 10, 2008, I granted the Commission’s motion for summary judgment with regard to liability. I held that: (1) the subject Diet Tea advertisement made claims about weight loss expressly, or by such strong…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- United States v. W. T. Grant Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
- Dombrowski v. PfisterSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Weinberger v. Romero-BarceloSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Mertens v. Hewitt AssociatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance v. KnudsonSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Federal Trade Commission v. Bronson Partners, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2011
- Smith v. Securities & Exchange CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2011
- U.S. Sec. & Exch. Comm'n v. AhmedDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2018
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. McGeeDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2012
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. AhmedDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2015
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.