Legal Opinion
Eckler v. Neutrogena Corp. CA2/7
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 9, 2015No. B253691; B253899UnpublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
IWASAKI, J. *
This case concerns congressional intent with respect to label information on sunscreen products: is it to be determined solely by the federal agency Congress charged with ensuring uniform labeling for those products, or, in addition, by each state through private civil suits? Appellants Kay Eckler and Steve Engel filed separate actions against respondent Neutrogena Corporation alleging that its sunscreen products were misleadingly labeled and marketed in violation of California consumer protection statutes. Appellants alleged that Neutrogena misleadingly labeled its…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Cipollone v. Liggett Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Blank v. KirwanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1985
- Wyeth v. LevineSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
- Geier v. American Honda Motor Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Smith v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2001
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Julian v. Mission Community HospitalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2017
- Trejo v. Johnson, California Court of Appeal, 5th District2017
- Daugherty v. Padagis Israel Pharmaceuticals LimitedDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2025
- Elder-Evins v. County of Sonoma CA1/5California Court of Appeal · 2021
- Greager v. McNeil PPC, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2019
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.