Legal Opinion
Ikonen v. Hartz Mountain Corp.
District Court, S.D. California
Decided September 20, 1988No. Civ. No. 87-1275-R(IEG)PublishedCited by 56 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
GORDON THOMPSON, Jr., Chief Judge.
I. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY
“Blockade” is an aerosol flea and tick spray made by defendant Hartz Mountain Corporation (Hartz). Blockade contains “DEET” and “fenvalerate” as active ingredients. Plaintiffs assert that these chemicals poison animals when applied to their skin.
Hartz first placed Blockade on the market for sale on January 1, 1987. Hartz conducted an extensive television and radio advertising campaign to promote it. By September 1, 1987, Hartz had sold 5.5 million cans of Blockade. Although Blockade’s labels described…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Phillips Petroleum Co. v. ShuttsSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Eisenberg v. GagnonCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1985
- In Re "Agent Orange" Product Liability Litigation Mdl No. 381Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by56 opinions
- Dianne Castano v. The American Tobacco CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1996
- Ford v. Murphy Oil USA, Inc.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1997
- Monterrubio v. Best Buy Stores, L.P.District Court, E.D. California · 2013
- In re Conagra Foods, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2015
- In re Conagra Foods, Inc.District Court, C.D. California · 2014
51 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.