Legal Opinion
City of Wyoming v. Procter & Gamble Co.
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided September 28, 2016No. Civil No. 15-2101 (JRT/TNL)PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTIONS TO DISMISS. John R. Tunheim, Chief Judge United States District Court
Hygienic wipes labeled and sold as “flushable” have caused and are continuing to cause increased costs and property damage to the governmental entities that operate sewer systems and water treatment facilities. These “flushable” wipes do not break down like toilet paper—or at least not all of them do—and as a result, they end their life at the tail end of the sewer line, clogging up sewer-system facilities. Those are the allegations of the Plaintiffs in this case, all of whom are…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- Ashcroft v. IqbalSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. TwomblySupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Lujan v. Defenders of WildlifeSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Papasan v. AllainSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern Cal.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Sloan v. Gen. Motors LLCDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2018
- Ambassador Press, Inc. v. Durst Image Technology U.S.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2020
- Kubicki ex rel. Kubicki v. Medtronic, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018
- Kelly v. BMO Harris Bank N.A. (In re Peters Co.)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · 2017
- Ambassador Press, Inc. v. Durst Image Technology U.S.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2020
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.