Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
- Law360
- Law360 UK
- Law360 Pulse
- Law360 Employment Authority
- Law360 Tax Authority
- Law360 Insurance Authority
- Law360 Real Estate Authority
- Law360 Healthcare Authority
- Law360 Bankruptcy Authority
- Products
- Lexis®
- Law360 In-Depth
- Law360 Podcasts
- Rankings
- Leaderboard Analytics
- Regional Powerhouses
- Law360's MVPs
- Women in Law Report
- Law360 400
- Diversity Snapshot
- Practice Groups of the Year
- Rising Stars
- Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar
- Sections
- Adv. Search & Platform Tools
- About all sections
- Browse all sections
- Banking
- Bankruptcy
- Class Action
- Competition
- Employment
- Energy
- Expert Analysis
- Insurance
- Intellectual Property
- Product Liability
- Securities
- Beta Tools
- Track docs
- Track attorneys
- Track judges
Maxwell v. Unilever United States, Inc. et al
Case Number:
5:12-cv-01736
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Multi Party Litigation:
Class Action
Judge:
Firms
- Covington & Burling
- Cuneo Gilbert
- Fleischman Bonner
- Gibson Dunn
- Keker Van Nest & Peters
- Morrison & Foerster
- Nelkin & Nelkin
- Pierce Gore Law Firm
Companies
Sectors & Industries:
-
March 29, 2018
Pepsi Is Clearly Artificial, Labeled Or Not, Judge Says
A consumer accusing PepsiCo Inc. of mislabeling its soft drinks should have recognized that the listing of "phosphoric acid" and "citric acid" meant the sodas were made with artificial flavors, a California federal judge ruled Thursday in tossing her allegations against the soda maker.
-
September 02, 2014
Unilever, PepsiCo Evade Some Claims In False-Ad Class Action
A California federal judge has trimmed a putative class action brought by a consumer who claims Unilever United States Inc., PepsiCo. Inc. and a Pepsi and Lipton Tea partnership misbranded their products through deceptive labeling practices, tossing all claims against products that the plaintiff did not purchase.