Legal Opinion
Marrone v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.
Ohio Supreme Court
Decided June 14, 2006No. 2004-1824PublishedCited by 51 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLundberg Stratton, J.
*6{¶ 1} Ohio’s Consumer Sales Practices Act (“CSPA”) prohibits unfair, deceptive, and unconscionable practices in consumer sales transactions. R.C. 1345.02 and 1345.03. A consumer has a cause of action and is entitled to relief for any violation of the CSPA. R.C. 1345.09. A consumer may, in an individual action, rescind the transaction or recover damages for a violation of the CSPA. R.C. 1345.09(A). However, if the violation is an act or practice that was declared to be deceptive or unconscionable by a rule adopted by the Attorney General before the consumer transaction on which the action is…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corporation v. Federal Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1983
- William C. Lewis v. Acb Business Services, Inc., (96-3093/3498), American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. James P. Connors, (96-3498)Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1998
- Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. ReillySupreme Court of the United States · 2001
- Price v. Philip Morris, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court · 2006
- James A. McKinnon v. Skil CorporationCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1981
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- Volbers-Klarich v. Middletown Management, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 2010
- Greene v. Gerber Products Co.District Court, E.D. New York · 2017
- In re Porsche Cars North America, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2012
- In re Sony Gaming Networks & Customer Data Security Breach LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2014
- In re Nexus 6P Prods. Liab. Litig.District Court, N.D. California · 2018
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.