MY NOTES: Business Organizations | Constitutional Law I | Copyright Law | Evidence | Wills and Trusts

Coca-Cola v. Tropicana Products, Inc., 690 F.2d 312 (1982) p.635


Tropicana ran commercial where person squeezed an orange into carton while stating "Its pure, pasteurized juice as it comes form the orange" and later "It's the only leading brand not made from concentrate and water." Coca-Cola (maker of Minute Maid) sued under section 43a claiming false advertising because commercial incorrectly represents that Tropicana contains unprocessed, fresh squeezed juice. In actuality, the juice is heated and frozen before packaging.


Consumers are likely to be misled by explicit misrepresentations which would cause irreparable injury. If explicitly false, don't need to do any surveys to find out how consumers are perceiving it. If implicit have to get evidence to see if consumers are perceiving the ad as misleading, deceptive, etc.


Preliminary injunction affirmed.


Commercial was factually false - squeezing of the orange into the container is an explicit misrepresentation; the words are also false - pasteurized juice does not come from the orange

Evidence show that consumers are likely to be misled - two surveys show substantial number of consumers were actually misled.

Since consumers are likely to be misled, it is very possible that they will switch form Minute Maid to Tropicana, thereby causing Coca-Cola irreparable injury.


Since the court found explicit (on its face) misrepresentation, plaintiff does not have to find out how consuming market is treating the advertisement.

If only implicit the plaintiff has to go out and find out how consuming market for the product is perceiving the symbol.

Created on: Thursday, March 16, 2000 at 18:07:41 (PST)

Copyright © Thompson Resources, 2000, all rights reserved.