Faced with a slew of consumer class action suits over supposedly flushable wipes but no consensus on the meaning of the word "flushable," a judge has decided to pause one of the cases to get a definition of the term from federal regulators.
October 08, 2015 at 10:00 AM
1 minute read
Faced with a slew of consumer class action suits over supposedly flushable wipes but no consensus on the meaning of the word “flushable,” a judge has decided to pause one of the cases to get a definition of the term from federal regulators.
Eastern District Judge Jack Weinstein stayed Belfiore v. The Procter & Gamble Company, 14-cv-4090, and referred the issue of an appropriate definition of “flushable” to the Federal Trade Commission.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The New York Law Journal honors attorneys and judges who have made a remarkable difference in the legal profession in New York.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Truly exceptional Bergen County New Jersey Law Firm is growing and seeks strong plaintiff's personal injury Attorney with 5-7 years plaintif...
Shipman is seeking an associate to join our Labor & Employment practice in our Hartford, New Haven, or Stamford office. Candidates shou...
Evergreen Trading is a media investment firm headquartered in NYC. We help brands achieve their goals by leveraging their unwanted assets to...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
