A class action case was filed against nine sellers of milk by several lactose-intolerant...

Question

A class action case was filed against nine sellers of milk by several lactose-intolerant individuals. They claimed they had drunk the milk before they realized they were lactose intolerant and, consequently, suffered temporary gas and stomach discomfort. They argued that the sellers had failed to warn consumers about the dangers of lactose intolerance by putting warning labels on milk containers. They sought damages and an injunction requiring milk sellers to put a warning label on all milk packaging that read: “Warning—If you experience diarrhea or stomach cramps after consuming milk, you may be lactose intolerant. Check with your physician.” The district court dismissed the suit, and the plaintiffs appealed. Why do you believe the court of appeals either granted or denied the appeal?Mills v. Giant of Maryland, LLC, 508 F.3d 11 (D.C. Cir. 2007).

Robert · Accepted Answer

Answer – As per the complete case law referred at the webpage quoted below, the Court of 
Appeals DENIED the appeal and upheld the decision of the District Court. Very 
appropriately, it did so because universally, all the eatables’ laws applicable by whatever 
name called, prescribe the constituents of the products only to be mentioned on the 
packaging.

A class action case was filed against nine sellers of milk by several lactose-intolerant individuals. They claimed they had drunk the milk before they realized they were lactose intolerant and,...

Solution

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

Submit New Assignment