Legal Opinion
Martinez v. Metabolife International., Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 12, 2003No. D040279PublishedCited by 149 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
McDONALD, J.
Respondents Gloria and George Martinez (together Plaintiffs) filed this action against appellant Metabolife International, Inc. (Mil) alleging that Gloria used Metabolife 356 (the Product), a product manufactured and marketed by Mil, in accordance with the instructions provided by MU, and that she suffered a stroke caused by her use of the Product. Mil appeals from the order denying its motion to strike Plaintiffs’ complaint under the anti-SLAPP statute (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16; all undesignated statutory references are to this code).
I
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
A.…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Navellier v. SlettenCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
- Equilon Enterprises v. Consumer Cause, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2002
- City of Cotati v. CashmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 2002
- Kasky v. Nike, Inc.California Supreme Court · 2002
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by149 opinions
- Peregrine Funding, Inc. v. Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLPCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2005
- Episcopal Church CasesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2009
- Mann v. Quality Old Time Service, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2004
- Cardinal Health 301, Inc. v. Tyco Electronics Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2008
- Hawran v. HixsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
144 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.