Fill a form in 3 easy steps - less than 5 mins.
Posted: March 21st, 2023
Write a case brief about “CASE Kasky v. Nike Inc.27 Cal.4th 939 Case
The brief should include
1. Facts
2. Procedural History
3. Issues
4. Reasoning/Analysis
Decisions/Holding
Case Brief: Kasky v. Nike Inc. 27 Cal.4th 939
Facts:
Nike Inc. was accused of operating sweatshops in foreign countries, which led to a negative impact on their public image. As a response, Nike released a series of press releases and letters to various organizations to defend its practices. However, Marc Kasky, a California resident, alleged that Nike’s statements were misleading and false, and filed a lawsuit against the company under California’s Unfair Competition Law (UCL) and False Advertising Law (FAL).
Procedural History:
The case was initially filed in California Superior Court, but was later moved to the California Supreme Court. The court granted Nike’s motion to dismiss the case on the grounds that the statements made by Nike were protected under the First Amendment, as they were part of a public debate on a matter of public interest.
Issues:
The main issue in the case was whether Nike’s statements were commercial speech, which is not protected under the First Amendment, or non-commercial speech, which is protected. Additionally, the court needed to determine whether the UCL and FAL applied to Nike’s statements, as they were not directly related to the company’s products or services.
Reasoning/Analysis:
The court held that Nike’s statements were commercial speech, as they were made in response to the negative impact on the company’s sales and reputation. Therefore, they were subject to regulation under the UCL and FAL. The court also found that the UCL and FAL were not limited to statements made in connection with the sale of goods or services, but could also apply to statements made in connection with a company’s business practices.
The court further held that Nike’s statements were not protected under the First Amendment, as they were potentially misleading and had a direct impact on consumers. The court noted that Nike had a duty to disclose any facts that would be material to consumers, and that Nike’s statements did not fully disclose the company’s labor practices.
Decisions/Holding:
The California Supreme Court held that Nike’s statements were commercial speech, subject to regulation under the UCL and FAL. The court further held that Nike’s statements were not protected under the First Amendment, as they were potentially misleading and had a direct impact on consumers. Therefore, the court allowed the case to proceed and reversed the lower court’s dismissal.
Every student wants the best grades and that’s our Focus
Our team consists of outstanding writers who have specialized knowledge in specific subject areas and academic research writing experience. They all hold at least a graduate degree and have been carefully selected to ensure the quality of our work. .
We are committed to hiring the most skilled writers who can deliver high-quality work at a reasonable price. Thus, we offer the best value for money without sacrificing the standard of our services. Our prices are suitable for students and competitive with other writing services in the industry.
The service guarantees that our final work is 100% original. We are committed to delivering plagiarism-free and AI-free work to our esteemed clients. To uphold this promise, we check every draft for any possible instances of duplication or artificiality before we send it to you. You can rely on us to produce genuine and high-standard content for your academic needs.
When you decide to place an order with Homework Ace Tutors, here is what happens: