Legal Opinion
Robinson v. ROOTO CORP.
District Court, W.D. Tennessee
Decided May 6, 2008No. 07-2543PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER GRANTING THE MOTION OF THE DEFENDANT TO DISMISS THE PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS BROUGHT PURSUANT TO THE FEDERAL HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES ACT AND THE POISON PREVENTION PACKAGING ACT
J. DANIEL BREEN, District Judge.
The Plaintiffs, Chinisha and Jazmín Robinson (“Robinsons”), brought this action against the Rooto Corporation (“Rooto”), alleging that they were injured by one of the Defendant’s products. The Complaint charges that the Rooto Corporation violated Tennessee products liability law, as well as the Federal Hazardous Substances Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1261-1278 and the Poison Prevention Packaging Act,…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Cort v. AshSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- IQ Products Company v. Pandora Mfg Inc, etCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2002
- Riegel Textile Corporation v. Celanese CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
- Pennsylvania General Insurance v. LandisDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2000
- Cross v. Board of Supervisors of San Mateo CountyDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1968
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Santiago v. Virgin Islands Housing AuthoritySupreme Court of The Virgin Islands · 2012