Healthcare lawyer Michael H Cohen was quoted in the Tan Sheet on an article about FDA Preemption Lawsuits involving Monster beverages.The article by Lisa Gillespie analyzed the “dueling lawsuits” between Monster Energy Corp. and the City of San Francisco. The City filed a lawsuit alleging that Monster vioalted California laws by marketing highly caffeinated energy drinks to young children.
Attorney Michael Cohen said if the case goes to trial, Monster could argue that it would have to change labeling and marketing that already meets federal requirements.
However as much as “it may be an economic burden on the company,” a court might not consider Herrera’s labeling demand an undue burden on interstate commerce, said Cohen, of Michael H. Cohen Law Group in Beverly Hills, Calif….
As to Monster’s Constitutional arguments, healthcare lawyer Michael H. Cohen said:
Arguing a constitutional violation turns on multiple variables, says Cohen. “Constitutional arguments need a lot of weight to gain traction. It’s all too easy to invoke the First Amendment, when there are competing interests, such as the municipality’s right to regulate locally,” he said.
The article, Monster Lawsuits Test State Preemption of FDA, came out may 27, 2013 in the Tan Sheet: Nonprescription Pharmaceuticals and Nutritionals.
Contact our healthcare law and FDA attorneys for legal advice relevant to your healthcare venture.
Contact Us
