Any assumed disclosure could cure deception with a simple explanation that the inherently misleading speech is a lie. [Again, both a good point about the unworkability of the current inherently misleading test under First Amendment doctrine and a good demonstration that the test isnt set up to judge tort claims.] However, the rest of the Central Hudson test can also be skipped, and the speech at issue banned outright, if the speech is in fact, misleading. The standard here is not that of a reasonable consumer, but a subjective standard
Related Links Smokers looking to pick up a pack of their go-to menthol cigarettes at their local corner store will find themselves out of luck Monday
By placing an order for this product on Amazon.com, you certify that you are over 18 years old
If your cigarette goes out: Tap off excess ash
This tool facilitated duplicate removal, study screening, tagging, and data extraction, improving workflow consistency
Not everyone who takes corticosteroids gets moon face
