Alleged false advertising of consumer products is one of the most active areas in class action litigation. As most of these matters conclude before the courts can offer an opinion on damages, it is often unclear which damages theories are viable. A recent Ninth Circuit decision, Chowning et al. v. Kohl’s Department Stores Inc. et al. clarifies the issue –available remedies are substantially narrower than those often asserted. In this Law360 article, Timothy Snail discusses the implications of the recent ruling, and uses well-known examples to illustrate common theories of damages.
CRA Sessions: AI in Practice | Copyright in the age of AI: Following the evidence
A historic $1.5 billion settlement by Anthropic delivered the first significant judicial ruling on the issue. The ruling is expected to influence how courts,...