A content analysis is reported on evidence introduced in deceptive advertising cases, evidence that is erroneous, meaning rejected as unable to establish the factual finding it was introduced to support. Further, this evidence is avoidably erroneous, meaning the invalidity and consequent rejection were predictable in advance on the basis of the professional knowledge of lawyers or researchers. The result is discussed as happening because of the nature of legal action and because of the interaction of lawyers and researchers. Implications of such avoidably erroneous evidence are discussed and suggestions are made for ways to eliminate them.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alpo v. Ralston (1989), 720 F. Supp. 194.
2.
Amana Refrigeration (1983), 102 FTC 1262.
3.
American Home Products (1981), 98 FTC 136.
4.
American Home Products v. Abbott (1981), 522 F. Supp. 1035.
5.
American Home Products v. Johnson & Johnson (1977), 436 F. Supp. 785.
6.
American Home Products v. Johnson & Johnson (1987), 654 F. Supp. 568.
7.
Aronberg v. FTC (1942), 132 F. Rptr. 2d 165.
8.
BaileyPatricia P., and PertschukMichael (1984), “Analysis of the Law of Deception,” enclosure in letter to Hon. John D. Dingell, February 23, 1984; reprinted in Antitrust and Trade Regulation Reporter (1984), 46, 372; reprinted with minor changes as “The Law of Deception: The Past as Prologue,”American University Law Review (1984), 33, 849.
9.
Beneficial (1975), 86 FTC 119.
10.
Borden v. Kraft (1984), 224 U. S. Patent Quarterly 811.
Ciba-Geigy v. Thompson Medical (1985), 672 F. Supp. 679.
19.
Cliffdale Associates, Inc. (1984), 103 FTC 110.
20.
Coca-Cola (1973), 83 FTC 746.
21.
Coca-Cola Co. v. Tropicana Products, Inc. (1982), 538 F. Supp. 1091.
22.
ColfordSteven W. (1991), “FTC May Back Green Role,”Advertising Age (September 30), 4
23.
Crown Central Petroleum (1974), 84 FTC 1493.
24.
Elliot Knitwear (1961), 59 FTC 893.
25.
Figgie (1986), 107 FTC 313.
26.
Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. (1972), 81 FTC 398.
27.
Ford Motor (1976), 87 FTC 756.
28.
Fruit of the Loom v. Sara Lee (1986), 674 F. Supp. 1020.
29.
Federal Trade Commission (1983), “FTC Policy Statement Regarding Advertising Substantiation Program,”Federal Register, 48, 10471; reprinted in Antitrust and Trade Regulation Reporter (1984), 47, 234; and as appendix to Thompson Medical (1984), 104 FTC 839.
30.
FTC v. Brown & Williamson (1983), 580 F. Supp. 981.
31.
FTC v. Sterling Drug (1963), 317 F. Rptr. 2d 669.
32.
General Nutrition (1986), unpublished initial decision followed by consent order: 111 FTC 387 (1989)
33.
Johnson & Johnson v. Carter-Wallace (1981), 78 Civ. 3986 (CBM), slip opinion, available on Lexis.
34.
Johnson & Johnson v. GAC International (1988), 862 F. Rptr. 2d 975.
35.
Johnson & Johnson v. Quality Pure (1979), 484 F. Supp. 975.
36.
Kenrec Sports (1972), 80 FTC 868.
37.
Kraft Inc. (1991), FTC slip opinion, reprinted in Trade Regulation Reporter (1991), 122,937.
38.
Kroger (1981), 98 FTC 639.
39.
LeConte Cosmetics (1976), 87 FTC 1348.
40.
Litton (1981), 97 FTC 1.
41.
McNeilab v. American Home Products (1980), 501 F. Supp. 517.
42.
McNeilab v. American Home Products (1987), 675 F. Supp. 819.
43.
McNeilab v. Bristol-Myers (1986), 656 F. Supp. 88.
44.
Mennen v. Gillette (1983), 565 F. Supp. 648.
45.
Merck (1966), 69 FTC 526.
46.
MillerJames C.III (1983), “Policy Statement on Deception,” enclosure in letter to Hon. John D. Dingell, October 14, 1983; reprinted as appendix to Cliffdale Associates, Inc. (1984), 103 FTC 174.
47.
Moretrench v. FTC (1942), 127 F. Rptr. 2d 792.
48.
Nu Dimensions (1972), 81 FTC 793.
49.
Philip Morris v. Loew's Theaters (1980), 511 F. Supp. 855.
50.
PrestonIvan L. (1987), “Extrinsic Evidence in Federal Trade Commission Deceptiveness Cases,”Columbia Business Law Review, 633.
51.
PrestonIvan L. (1989a), “False or Deceptive Advertising Under the Lanham Act: Analysis of Factual Findings and Types of Evidence,”Trademark Reporter, 79, 508.
52.
PrestonIvan L. (1989b), “The Federal Trade Commission's Identification of Implications as Constituting Deceptive Advertising,”Cincinnati Law Review, 57, 1243.
53.
PrestonIvan L. (1990), “The Definition of Deceptiveness in Advertising and Other Commercial Speech,”Catholic University Law Review, 39, 1035.
54.
Ragold v. Ferrero (1980), 506 F. Supp. 1a17.
55.
Removatron (1988), 111 FTC 206.
56.
Revco (1965), 67 FTC 1158.
57.
Rhodes Pharmacal (1952), 49 FTC 263.
58.
R. J. Reynolds v. Loew's Theaters (1980), 511 F. Supp. 867.
59.
Sears Roebuck (1980), 95 FTC 406.
60.
Squibb v. Stuart (1990), Civ. 90-1178, slip opinion of D.C.N.J., October 16.
61.
Standard Brands (1981), 97 FTC 233.
62.
Standard Oil of California (1974), 84 FTC 1401.
63.
Sterling Drug, Inc. (1983), 102 FTC 395.
64.
Stiffel v. Westwood Lighting (1987), 658 F. Supp. 1103.
65.
Sun Oil (1974), 84 FTC 247.
66.
Teledyne (1981), 97 FTC 320.
67.
Thompson Medical Co., Inc. (1984), 104 FTC 648.
68.
U-Haul v. Jartran (1981), 522 F. Supp. 1238.
69.
Upjohn v. American Home Products (1984), 598 F. Supp. 550.
70.
Upjohn v. Riahom (1986), 641 F. Supp. 1209.
71.
Vidal Sassoon v. Bristol-Myers (1981), 661 F. Rptr. 2d 272.
