15 U.S.C. § 1831
Authorization of appropriations
There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this chapter $125,000 for the period beginning
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1996–2009 · leading case: Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly, 533 U.S. 525 (2001).
Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly, 533 U.S. 525 (2001). “I join the opinion of the Court (with the exception of Part III — B—1) because I agree that the Massachusetts cigarette advertising regulations are pre-empted by the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act, 15 U. S. C. § 1831 et seq. I also agree with the Court’s…”
Peter v. Ford Motor Co., 913 N.E.2d 311 (Ind. Ct. App. 2009). “" 15 U.S.C. § 1831 . To this end, the FCLAA has two express preemption provisions: 1) prohibiting the requirement of additional statements relating to smoking and health on cigarette packages, 15 U.”
Wilson v. Pleasant, 660 N.E.2d 327 (Ind. 1996). “282 , as amended, 15 U.S.C. § 1831 et seq., and found "no general, inherent conflict between federal preemption of state warning requirements and the continued vitality of state common law damages actions.”
Tillman v. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 89 F. Supp. 2d 1297 (S.D. Ala. 2000). “PREEMPTION Finally, plaintiff has conceded that post-1969 claims related to the adequacy *1304 of the warnings about the effect of smoking on ones’ health are preempted by the Federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1831 , et. seq. (1982). Plaintiffs Brief at…”
Premium Tobacco Stores, Inc. v. Fisher, 51 F. Supp. 2d 1099 (D. Colo. 1999). “Plaintiffs next argue the statutes violate the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution because the state regulation of cigarette distribution is preempted by the federal Cigarette Labeling and Advertising Statutes, 15 U.S.C. § 1831 , et seq. (Pl.s’ Br. Supp.”
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.