Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Kurtz v. Kimberly-Clark Corp.
Citations: 315 F.R.D. 157; 2016 WL 3571481Docket: 14-CV-1142; 14-CV-4090; 15-CV-2909; 15-CV-2910; 15-CV-2928; 15-CV-4579
Court: District Court, E.D. New York; June 28, 2016; Federal District Court
In October 2015, class certification for several cases regarding "flushable" wipes was stayed, and the definition of "flushable" was referred to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for determination. The court emphasized the importance of a uniform national definition to protect consumers and minimize inconsistent legal judgments, which could facilitate potential settlements. The FTC has broad regulatory authority over advertising practices and was noted to be investigating various manufacturers of "flushable" wipes. The court referenced a final consent decree that the FTC had with Nice-Pak Products, Inc. concerning its "flushable" wipe products and acknowledged ongoing investigations into other manufacturers, including defendants in the current cases. Additionally, on June 10, 2016, the Administrative Conference of the United States adopted a recommendation advocating for the aggregation of similar claims in agency adjudications, indicating that federal agencies have discretion to aggregate cases when appropriate. This recommendation is seen as a potential pathway for addressing the claims in the current cases through aggregate adjudication before the FTC. The court encourages the parties involved to consider this new avenue for resolving their claims collectively.