About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

Case Citations [1] (Spring 2024)

handle is hein.ali/retuc0517 and id is 1 raw text is: THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE Spring 2024 Citations UNFAIR COMPETITION 3D CHAPTER 1. THE FREEDOM TO COMPETE § 1. General Principles M.D.Pa.2022. Quot. in sup., and cit. in case cit. in sup.; com. (g) quot. in case quot. in sup. Provider of inmate communication-technology services sued, among others, competitor that had existing contracts with prison, alleging that competitor tortiously interfered with provider's prospective business relations with prison, because competitor unfairly competed with provider by making false statements about provider to prison warden. This court granted competitor's motion to dismiss, holding that provider failed to allege that competitor lacked the privilege to carry out its actions. Citing Restatement Third of Unfair Competition § 1, the court pointed out that provider was required to demonstrate that competitor engaged in conduct that was actionable on a basis independent of its tortious-interference claim, and here, competitor's purportedly unfair competition arose from statements that were inactionable opinion and predictions. Smart Communications Holding, Inc. v. Global Tel-Link Corporation, 638 F.Supp.3d 430, 449, 451. CHAPTER 2. DECEPTIVE MARKETING § 2. Deceptive Marketing: General Principle Or.2023. Com. (b) cit. in sup. State government sued energy-drink company, alleging that defendant's advertisements, which claimed that its energy drinks' non-caffeine ingredients provided extra energy and focus and that a majority of doctors approved their use as energy supplements, violated state consumer-protection laws. The trial court granted defendant's motion for summary judgment. The court of appeals affirmed. This court reversed and remanded, holding that the statutes regulating defendant's representations that its products were approved of by doctors were not facially unconstitutional. The court cited Restatement Third of Unfair Competition § 2, Comment b, in pointing out that the relevant statutes served to avoid economic harm based on deceptive commercial practices, which was a purpose that was well-recognized by freedom-of-speech provisions in the state constitution and did not require COPYRIGHT (2024 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most