Puritec

People ex rel. Brown v. Puritec

Good Law
153 Cal. App. 4th 1524·2007 Cal. App. LEXIS 1292·64 Cal. Rptr. 3d 270
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 7, 2007No. C052167California4,402 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Davis, J.

California has two statutes that prohibit the seller of a water treatment device from making performance or benefit claims that the device affects health or the safety of drinking water, unless the device has been certified by the State Department of Public Health: Health and Safety Code section 116835, subdivision (a), and Business and Professions Code section 17577.2, subdivision (c). 1

In this appeal we conclude that these two statutes do not violate the federal Constitution’s dormant commerce clause or First Amendment, as applied to health claims made by defendant PuriTec (PuriTec) on its Internet Web site concerning uncertified water treatment devices it offers for sale to California consumers. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment.

Background

PuriTec is a Nevada company that sells water treatment devices internationally, including to California consumers. PuriTec’s primary method of advertising is its Internet Web site (Web site).

Since 1991, the State of California (the State) has required that sellers of water treatment devices (to California consumers) that make “health claims” *1529 regarding those devices have those devices certified by the Department of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.