Brenton
Brenton v. Metabolife International, Inc.
Opinion
Opinion
McDONALD, J.
Plaintiff Ashleigh Brenton filed this action against defendant Metabolife International, Inc. (Mil) alleging that Brenton used Metabolife 356 (the Product), a product manufactured and marketed by Mil, in accordance with the instructions provided by MU, and that she suffered a psychotic breakdown as the result of her use of the Product. Mil appeals the order denying its motion to strike Brenton’s complaint under the anti-SLAPP statute (Code Civ. Proc., § 425.16).
I
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
A. The Complaint
Brenton’s complaint alleged she consumed the Product in accordance with the use instructions for a few months before she suffered a psychotic breakdown in June 2000, and that her injuries were caused by the effects of ingredients (including ephedrine) contained in the Product. Brenton pleaded causes of action for product liability, negligence, breach of express and implied warranty and fraud, and sought compensatory and punitive damages. She also alleged that Mil’s false advertising for and misbranding of the Product violated Business and Professions Code sections 17200 and 17500 and sought the remedies provided by those statutes.