Hershey’s Company was recently sued for $5 billion for false representation. One may question how a candy company could get sued because of the depiction of their product. The Hershey Company is well known for many chocolate and candy products, including Reese’s Peanut Butter products. Cynthia Kelly filed a class action lawsuit against Hershey “for falsely representing several Reese’s Peanut Butter products as containing explicit carved out artistic designs when there are no such carvings in the actual products” (Kelly v. The Hershey Company, 2023, p. 2). This case is an example of product misrepresentation; a branch of fraudulent misrepresentation. Product misrepresentation can affect many people, including myself, and regarding its implications, …show more content…
457). This can be summed up to say that if a seller sold a product that appeared different than what was advertised knowing it was false, and the buyer bought the product because of how it was portrayed, it is fraudulent misrepresentation. In Kelly v. The Hershey Company, the plaintiff can make a case for fraudulent misrepresentation. Firstly, the representation has to be fact. According to Prince, “failure to disclose facts may amount to a false representation” (2006, p. 266). The Hershey Company failed to disclose that their product did not contain carvings. The plaintiff must also prove the reliance was justifiable (Owen, 2000, p. 72). This helps check that the misrepresentation was factual rather than an opinion and whether it was material or trivial (Owen, 2000, p. 76). Kelly and the general population that bought Reese’s candy were reasonable customers and were misled for reasonable reasons. Secondly, the representation must be false. The plaintiff must show that the defendant’s product representation was not fully the truth (Prince, 2006, p.
This Further Oral Activity will be presented in a T.V. show format (Based on the show “The Gruen Transfer”), with the host focusing on the false advertising of well-known health foods and drinks. This FOA will focus on the persuasive language and manipulative strategies used by businesses to influence and mislead consumers into believing false perceptions of their product, using case examples to support the evidence presented. The purpose of this FOA to inform the audience on the plethora of manipulative and persuasive language used in advertising from ‘supposedly’ healthy products, while the target audience is Australian T.V. viewers 18-50 who are interested in the influence of advertising. The context of the piece is based on today’s
According to the court case on Pam Huber v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., I am in agreement with the fact that the “district court granted summary judgment in favor of Huber” (Morgan, p.413) and that Wal-Mart gave Pam Huber, a maintenance associated job due to her disability. In doing so, I am also in agreement with the fact that Wal-Mart did not breach the American with Disability Act of 1990 due to the fact that Wal-Mart specifically stated what was required of Pam Huber to do on the job. Due to that, I am in agreement with Wal-Mart’s decision to hire a capable candidate in replace of Pam Huber due to their policy.
Matt Theurer was an 18 year old high school senior and a member of the National Guard. He is employed by McDonald's, the defendant. Matt's manager knew Matt had to drive about 20 minutes to and from work. Matt was scheduled to work a shift at McDonald's from 3:30 pm to 7:30 pm on April 4th, 1988 and 5:00 am to 8:21 am on April 5th, 1988. He was also given a voluntary opportunity for a cleanup shift from 12:00 am to 5:00 am on April 5th, 1988 which he accepted. Matt worked all of his assigned hours, including the voluntary shift. After the last shift was complete,
Though Ira C. Herbert was correct that Coca-Cola had used the phrase “It’s the real thing” before Grove Press, Richard Seaver’s response was more persuasive. Herbert’s letter was formal and dry, while Seaver’s adopted an ironic tone to degrade Herbert’s case. The combination of appeals present in Seaver’s letter, when compared to Herbert’s reliance primarily upon logos, construct an argument that is
v. VIP Prods., LLC 666 F. Supp. 2d 974 (Mo., 2008) Anheuser-Busch makes a distinction between confusing and non-confusing parodies, the latter being protected as a parody. The important factors in the case were that the price point of the products was the same, they were directly competing goods and the survey showed that there was a level of confusion (30.3% were confused), in addition, consideration was placed on irreparable harm caused by the defendants use of the mark, the priority lay with the first to register the trademark, lastly the District Court considered public interest, i.e. whether the public was deceived. Similarly in Starbucks Corp v. Wolfe’s Borough Coffee Inc., 588 F3d 97 (2d Cir. 2007) the court distinguished Louis Vuitton S.A. v Haute Diggty Dog, LLC, 507 F.3d 252 (4th Cir. 2007) by holding that if (as in the Louis Vuitton case), the mark is used in non-competing goods, the defendant conveyed that it was not the source of the plaintiffs product and if the actual use of the mark does not impair the distinctiveness of the plaintiff’s mark there may be an argument in favor of the defendant, however, if the defendant’s humor is not conveyed to the public, and does not increase the public identification of the plaintiff’s mark with its mark it will fail to establish
This case is based on Mrs. Jennifer Sharkey, who sued J.P. Morgan & Co. (JCMC), Mr. Kenny, Mr. Green, and Mrs. Lassiter, alleging breach of contract and violations of the SOX anti-retaliation statute. The facts started when Mrs. Sharkey was assigned to a Suspect Client 's account where members of JPMC expressed to her their concern regarding to this account because they suspected that the Suspect Client was involved in illegal activities. After Mrs. Sharkey’s investigation, she claimed that she informed her conclusions to superiors Mr. Kenny, Mr. Green, and Mrs. Lassiter, of the Suspect Client 's potential unlawful activities, such as: money laundering, mail fraud, bank engaged in fraud, and violations of federal securities laws. After
Just like the kid that buys a sugary cereal just because it has Spongebob Squarepants on it, or like the person that goes to Disneyland to have fun but at end of that day, they can buy a churro. Parents also need to take a action in this too, just because you kid gives you a temper tantrum doesn’t mean that you need to buy them the candy they want in order for them to stop crying, and parents should also be informed of the things that their kids are consuming at their schools. Food companies should market or promote the TINY WORDS on the back of their product that informs all of the substances they used to make the product, to the consumer. Just like they would promote their food products to get consumers. Think about these following questions: What will you do to be informed of the chemicals used on the products you and your family consumes? Is it worth buying just because it has your favorite characters, movie, or games on
There have been many Supreme Court cases that dealed with many concepts of the law, like obscenity for example. As a matter of fact, obscenity is a concept that Miller v. California deals with. To be more specific, this case deals with what is considered obscene, and if the specific obscenity mentioned in this case is protected by the first amendment, the freedom of speech. I will now explain this case in more depth.
Blackburn was candid that most of his clients were “in the (drug) life at some level” and many of them had prior arrests. For instance, Billy Wafer, was on probation for possession of marijuana at the time when he was accused of selling cocaine to Coleman. “I ain’t an angel but I’ve never sold drugs,” said Wafer. Wafer, unlike most of the other defendants, had his charges dropped because he had a rock solid alibi with time cards from his job. Also, his supervisor testified verifying he was at work when Coleman claimed he sold him cocaine.
Dred Scott, an African American man who was born into slavery, wanted what all slaves would have wanted, their freedom. They were mistreated, neglected, and treated not as humans, but as property. In 1852, Dred Scott sued his current owner, Sanford, about him, no longer being a slave, but a free man (Oyez 1). In Article four of the Constitution, it states that any slave, who set foot in a free land, makes them a free man. This controversy led to the ruling of the state courts and in the end, came to the final word of the Supreme Court. Is he a slave or a free man?
In Lee Ann Fisher Baron’s “Junk Science,” she claims that the “food industry with the help of federal regulators” sometimes use “[a science that] bypasses [the] system of peer review. Presented directly to the public by…‘experts’ or ‘activists,’ often with little or no supporting evidence, this ‘junk science’ undermines the ability…[for] everyday consumers to make rational decisions” (921). Yet Americans still have a lot of faith in the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). According to a 2013 Pew Research study, 65% of Americans are “very favorable” or “mostly favorable” of the FDA. When it comes to what people put in their bodies, the FDA has a moral obligation to be truthful and transparent. The bottom line of the FDA’s myriad of responsibilities is to help protect the health of Americans. Deciding what to eat is a critical part of living healthily, and consumers must be able to trust that this massive government agency is informing them properly of the contents of food. While the FDA does an excellent job in many areas, it has flaws in other areas. One of its flaws is allowing the food industry to print food labels that are deceptive, unclear, or simply not true (known as misbranding). This is quite the hot topic because a Google search for “Should I trust food labels” returns well over 20 million results, many of which are blog posts from online writers begging their readers not to trust food labels. HowStuffWorks, a division of Discovery Communications, published an online article whose author claims that “[the food industry] will put what they want on labels. They know the game….” While the food industry is partially at blame for misbranding, the FDA is allowing it to happen. If a mother tells her children that it is oka...
Facts: Mr. Walter Mickens Jr. brought an appeal, habeas petition, after being sentenced to death for premeditated murder, during or following the act of sodomy of Timothy Hall. Mr. Mickens later had learned that his appointed attorney had represented the victim at a prior date and stated this course of action violated his sixth amendment and was a conflict of interest on his attorney’s part. His lead attorney, Mr. Brian Saunders, never at any point of his representation of Mr. Mickens, disclosed he had represented the victim or let the District Judge know when he was appointed to Mr. Mickens that he had in the past represented Mr. Hall, victim, in juvenile
Skinner v state of oklahoma The first case of many cases dealing with the topic of the reproductive system , the rights of an individual to have the rights to a choice in reproduction . Though Roe v Wade is the most commonly known of the Supreme Court cases regarding reproductive rights it was not the first Supreme Court case regarding this topic. Reproductive rights was in fact not Roe v. Wade , but rather this case had no element that discussed the principle of abortion or contraceptive use.Skinner V, State of oklahoma Rather this case dealt with the topic of a discipline/ punishment based forced sterilization,( the removal of the reproductive capabilities
Sutherland, Lisa., MacKenzie, Todd., Purvis, Lisa., Dalton, Madeline. “Research shows that food and beverage product placements in movies may be a potent source of advertising to children.” Hood Center of Children and Families. Retrieved April 22, 2014. (http://hoodcenter.dartmouth.edu/FoodProductPlacement.html)
The Hershey Food Corporation is a very successful and quality business. Many products are manufactured by this corporation. Most relating, but not limited to chocolate. The corporation plays a role in deciding where products are produced. Hershey’s has expanded to both Canada and Mexico, which calls for many corporate decisions. There are an amazing amount of products associated with Hershey. These include Jolly Ranchers, Hershey Kisses, Hershey drink mixes, the entire line of Reese’s products as well as good old fashion chocolate bars. These products serve in the candy/snack foods division of sales. Society could do without them... but why would we want to?