616.270
Determining when label or advertisement misleading. If any article is alleged to be
misbranded because the labeling is misleading, or if any advertisement is
alleged to be false because it is misleading, then in determining whether the
labeling or advertisement is misleading, there shall be taken into account,
among other things, not only representations made or suggested by statement,
word, design, device, sound or in any combination thereof, but also the extent
to which the labeling or advertisement fails to reveal facts material in the
light of such representations or material with respect to consequences which
may result from the use of the article to which the labeling or advertisement
relates under the conditions of use prescribed in the labeling or advertisement
thereof or under such conditions of use as are customary or usual.
Notes of Decisions
Bohr v. Tillamook Cnty. Creamery Assn., 516 P.3d 284 (Or. Ct. App. 2022).
· cites it 4× “265 and ORS 616.270. Because defendant was prohib- ited from advertising its products by state law plaintiffs and the class seek damages based upon the purchase price for those illegally advertised products.”
Bohr v. Tillamook Cnty. Creamery Assn. (Or. 2025).
· cites it 3× “265, and ORS 616.270; further, because Tillamook was “prohibited” from engaging in such conduct, plaintiffs were damaged in the amount of their “purchase price.”
Bohr v. Tillamook Cnty. Creamery Assn. (Or. 2025).
· cites it 2× “265 or ORS 616.270, are Plaintiffs and the members of the putative class required to plead and prove reliance upon Defendant’s representations for their claims that Defendant violated the Unlawful Trade Practices Act, ORS 646.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.