{ "attribution": { "source": "legal.exploreworldai.com", "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ohioctapp-25ap0011-2026-03-23", "cite_as": "NovaCopilot, legal.exploreworldai.com (https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ohioctapp-25ap0011-2026-03-23)", "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/revision", "version": "legal-2026-10-09", "fingerprint": "ewai:us:85f6be", "proof": "sha256:8d6f2968414b0ae55647140b5acde835b4cd1e992a1bf5e57fb09c253e6d0710", "jurisdiction": "us", "lang": "en", "publisher": "NovaCopilot by ExploreWorld Legal", "terms": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/om" }, "brand_source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "item": { "schema_version": "1.0.0", "id": "us:ohioctapp-25ap0011-2026-03-23", "jurisdiction": "us", "lang": "en", "brand_source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "brand": { "product": "NovaCopilot", "platform": "ExploreWorldAI", "infrastructure": "ExploreWorld Legal", "infrastructure_url": "legal.exploreworldai.com", "legal_entity": "Valkiv Ventures AB", "permanent_url": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/novacopilot", "source": "Source: NovaCopilot", "powered_by": "Powered by NovaCopilot", "license": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/licensvillkor" }, "sections": [ { "title": "Front matter", "paragraphs": [ "para_1", "para_2", "para_3", "para_4", "para_5", "para_6", "para_7", "para_8", "para_9", "para_10", "para_11", "para_12", "para_13", "para_14", "para_15", "para_16", "para_17", "para_18", "para_19", "para_20", "para_21", "para_22", "para_23", "para_24", "para_25", "para_26", "para_27", "para_28", "para_29", "para_30", "para_31", "para_32", "para_33", "para_34", "para_35", "para_36", "para_37", "para_38", "para_39", "para_40", "para_41", "para_42", "para_43", "para_44", "para_45", "para_46", "para_47", "para_48", "para_49", "para_50", "para_51", "para_52", "para_53", "para_54", "para_55", "para_56", "para_57", "para_58", "para_59", "para_60", "para_61", "para_62", "para_63", "para_64", "para_65", "para_66", "para_67", "para_68", "para_69", "para_70", "para_71", "para_72", "para_73", "para_74", "para_75", "para_76", "para_77", "para_78", "para_79", "para_80", "para_81", "para_82", "para_83", "para_84", "para_85", "para_86", "para_87", "para_88", "para_89", "para_90", "para_91", "para_92", "para_93", "para_94", "para_95", "para_96", "para_97", "para_98", "para_99", "para_100", "para_101", "para_102", "para_103", "para_104", "para_105", "para_106", "para_107", "para_108", "para_109", "para_110", "para_111", "para_112", "para_113", "para_114", "para_115", "para_116", "para_117", "para_118", "para_119", "para_120", "para_121", "para_122", "para_123", "para_124", "para_125", "para_126", "para_127", "para_128", "para_129", "para_130", "para_131", "para_132", "para_133", "para_134", "para_135", "para_136", "para_137", "para_138", "para_139", "para_140", "para_141", "para_142", "para_143", "para_144", "para_145", "para_146", "para_147", "para_148", "para_149", "para_150", "para_151", "para_152", "para_153", "para_154", "para_155", "para_156", "para_157", "para_158", "para_159", "para_160", "para_161", "para_162", "para_163", "para_164", "para_165", "para_166", "para_167", "para_168", "para_169", "para_170", "para_171", "para_172", "para_173", "para_174", "para_175", "para_176", "para_177", "para_178", "para_179", "para_180", "para_181", "para_182", "para_183", "para_184", "para_185", "para_186", "para_187", "para_188", "para_189", "para_190", "para_191", "para_192", "para_193", "para_194", "para_195", "para_196", "para_197", "para_198", "para_199", "para_200", "para_201", "para_202", "para_203", "para_204", "para_205", "para_206", "para_207", "para_208", "para_209", "para_210", "para_211", "para_212", "para_213", "para_214", "para_215", "para_216", "para_217", "para_218", "para_219", "para_220", "para_221", "para_222", "para_223", "para_224", "para_225", "para_226", "para_227", "para_228", "para_229", "para_230", "para_231", "para_232", "para_233", "para_234", "para_235", "para_236", "para_237", "para_238", "para_239", "para_240", "para_241", "para_242", "para_243", "para_244", "para_245", "para_246", "para_247", "para_248", "para_249", "para_250", "para_251", "para_252", "para_253", "para_254", "para_255", "para_256", "para_257", "para_258", "para_259", "para_260", "para_261", "para_262", "para_263", "para_264", "para_265", "para_266", "para_267", "para_268", "para_269", "para_270", "para_271", "para_272", "para_273", "para_274", "para_275", "para_276", "para_277", "para_278", "para_279", "para_280", "para_281", "para_282", "para_283", "para_284", "para_285", "para_286", "para_287", "para_288", "para_289", "para_290", "para_291", "para_292", "para_293", "para_294", "para_295", "para_296", "para_297", "para_298", "para_299", "para_300", "para_301", "para_302", "para_303", "para_304", "para_305", "para_306", "para_307", "para_308", "para_309", "para_310", "para_311", "para_312", "para_313", "para_314", "para_315", "para_316", "para_317", "para_318", "para_319", "para_320", "para_321", "para_322", "para_323", "para_324", "para_325", "para_326", "para_327", "para_328", "para_329", "para_330", "para_331", "para_332", "para_333", "para_334", "para_335", "para_336", "para_337", "para_338", "para_339", "para_340", "para_341", "para_342", "para_343", "para_344", "para_345", "para_346", "para_347", "para_348", "para_349", "para_350", "para_351", "para_352", "para_353", "para_354", "para_355", "para_356", "para_357", "para_358", "para_359", "para_360", "para_361", "para_362", "para_363", "para_364", "para_365", "para_366", "para_367", "para_368", "para_369", "para_370", "para_371", "para_372", "para_373", "para_374", "para_375", "para_376", "para_377", "para_378", "para_379", "para_380", "para_381", "para_382", "para_383", "para_384", "para_385", "para_386", "para_387", "para_388", "para_389", "para_390", "para_391", "para_392", "para_393", "para_394", "para_395", "para_396", "para_397", "para_398", "para_399", "para_400", "para_401", "para_402", "para_403", "para_404", "para_405" ], "kind": "front_matter" } ], "paragraphs": [ { "text": "[Cite as State ex rel. Yost v. Orrville Tobacco & Vape Shop, L.L.C., 2026-Ohio-983.]", "paragraph_id": "para_1" }, { "text": "STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS", "paragraph_id": "para_2" }, { "text": ")ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT", "paragraph_id": "para_3" }, { "text": "COUNTY OF WAYNE )", "paragraph_id": "para_4" }, { "text": "STATE EX REL. ATTORNEY GENERAL", "paragraph_id": "para_5" }, { "text": "DAVE YOST", "paragraph_id": "para_6" }, { "text": "Appellant", "paragraph_id": "para_7" }, { "text": "v.", "paragraph_id": "para_8" }, { "text": "ORRVILLE TOBACCO AND VAPE", "paragraph_id": "para_9" }, { "text": "SHOP, LLC, et al.", "paragraph_id": "para_10" }, { "text": "Appellee", "paragraph_id": "para_11" }, { "text": "C.A. No. 25AP0011", "paragraph_id": "para_12" }, { "text": "APPEAL FROM JUDGMENT", "paragraph_id": "para_13" }, { "text": "ENTERED IN THE", "paragraph_id": "para_14" }, { "text": "COURT OF COMMON PLEAS", "paragraph_id": "para_15" }, { "text": "COUNTY OF WAYNE, OHIO", "paragraph_id": "para_16" }, { "text": "CASE No. 2024CVC-11 000327", "paragraph_id": "para_17" }, { "text": "DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY", "paragraph_id": "para_18" }, { "text": "Dated: March 23, 2026", "paragraph_id": "para_19" }, { "text": "SUTTON, Judge.", "paragraph_id": "para_20" }, { "text": "{¶1} Plaintiff-Appellant State of Ohio ex rel. Attorney General Dave Yost (the “State”)", "paragraph_id": "para_21" }, { "text": "appeals from the judgment of the Wayne County Court of Common Pleas granting the motion to", "paragraph_id": "para_22" }, { "text": "dismiss filed by Defendant-Appellee Orrville Tobacco and Vape Shop, LLC (“Orrville Tobacco”).", "paragraph_id": "para_23" }, { "text": "For the reasons that follow, we reverse.", "paragraph_id": "para_24" }, { "text": "I.", "paragraph_id": "para_25" }, { "text": "Introduction", "paragraph_id": "para_26" }, { "text": "{¶2} The State of Ohio has enacted consumer protection laws to protect Ohio consumers", "paragraph_id": "para_27" }, { "text": "from unfair and deceptive sales practices. Tobacco products, including electronic cigarettes, also", "paragraph_id": "para_28" }, { "text": "known as “vapes,” are heavily regulated by the federal government for the protection of public", "paragraph_id": "para_29" }, { "text": "health. This case involves the interplay between federal and Ohio laws regulating the sale,", "paragraph_id": "para_30" }, { "text": "labeling, and marketing of tobacco products in Ohio.", "paragraph_id": "para_31" }, { "text": "2", "paragraph_id": "para_32" }, { "text": "{¶3} Orrville Tobacco is an Ohio retailer that sells tobacco products, including vapes.", "paragraph_id": "para_33", "court_paragraph": 2 }, { "text": "The State has alleged that Orrville Tobacco sells illegal vapes that carry the label, sale “only", "paragraph_id": "para_34" }, { "text": "allowed in the United States,” and that the illegal vapes are not authorized to be sold in the United", "paragraph_id": "para_35" }, { "text": "States or in Ohio. The State further claims that Orrville Tobacco is engaging in deceptive sales", "paragraph_id": "para_36" }, { "text": "practices in violation of Ohio law by failing to clearly and conspicuously disclose that the products", "paragraph_id": "para_37" }, { "text": "it offers for sale are not legal to be sold in the United States or in Ohio. Orrville Tobacco argues", "paragraph_id": "para_38" }, { "text": "that federal law requires all tobacco products, including products not authorized by the United", "paragraph_id": "para_39" }, { "text": "States Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”), to be labeled “[s]ale only allowed in the United", "paragraph_id": "para_40" }, { "text": "States.” Orrville Tobacco argues it is therefore protected from the State’s enforcement of its", "paragraph_id": "para_41" }, { "text": "consumer protection laws due to the “safe harbor” provision of Ohio’s Consumer Sales Practices", "paragraph_id": "para_42" }, { "text": "Act (“CSPA”), which exempts acts required by federal law, and further argues federal law", "paragraph_id": "para_43" }, { "text": "preempts the CSPA’s prohibition against deceptive sales practices when the product is a tobacco", "paragraph_id": "para_44" }, { "text": "product that carries the label “sale only allowed in the United States.”", "paragraph_id": "para_45" }, { "text": "{¶4} Stated another way, Orrville Tobacco’s argument is that state and federal laws", "paragraph_id": "para_46" }, { "text": "enacted to protect consumers of tobacco products should be applied to protect a retailer’s deceptive", "paragraph_id": "para_47" }, { "text": "acts to sell illegal unauthorized tobacco products.", "paragraph_id": "para_48" }, { "text": "Relevant Background Information", "paragraph_id": "para_49" }, { "text": "{¶5} In order to protect Ohio consumers, the State filed a complaint alleging that Orrville", "paragraph_id": "para_50" }, { "text": "Tobacco is engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices in violation of the CSPA, R.C. 1345.01", "paragraph_id": "para_51" }, { "text": "et seq. The complaint alleges in part, “Orrville Tobacco has committed unfair or deceptive acts or", "paragraph_id": "para_52" }, { "text": "practices in violation of [the CSPA], R.C. 1345.02(A), by failing to clearly and conspicuously", "paragraph_id": "para_53" }, { "text": "disclose that the products it offers for sale are not legal to be sold in the United States or in Ohio.”", "paragraph_id": "para_54" }, { "text": "3", "paragraph_id": "para_55" }, { "text": "The relief sought by the State includes a declaration that Orrville Tobacco has violated the CSPA", "paragraph_id": "para_56", "court_paragraph": 3 }, { "text": "and an order permanently enjoining Orrville Tobacco from further violating the CSPA.", "paragraph_id": "para_57" }, { "text": "{¶6} Orrville Tobacco moved the trial court to dismiss the State’s complaint pursuant to", "paragraph_id": "para_58" }, { "text": "Civ.R. 12(B)(6), arguing federal law requires all vapes sold by Orrville Tobacco to be labeled “sale", "paragraph_id": "para_59" }, { "text": "only allowed in United States,” and because the State’s claims are based on an act required by", "paragraph_id": "para_60" }, { "text": "federal law, the State’s complaint is barred by the “safe harbor” provision of Ohio’s CSPA. In", "paragraph_id": "para_61" }, { "text": "addition, Orrville Tobacco argued that the State’s claims are preempted by federal law, specifically", "paragraph_id": "para_62" }, { "text": "the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”), 21 U.S.C. 387t(a)(1), which it argues", "paragraph_id": "para_63" }, { "text": "mandates the label “sale only allowed in the United States” on tobacco products, including the", "paragraph_id": "para_64" }, { "text": "illegal and unauthorized vapes sold by Orrville Tobacco.", "paragraph_id": "para_65" }, { "text": "{¶7} The trial court granted Orrville Tobacco’s motion to dismiss. It held that the", "paragraph_id": "para_66" }, { "text": "CSPA’s “safe harbor” provision in R.C. 1345.12(A) applies and “remove[s] the controversy", "paragraph_id": "para_67" }, { "text": "concerning the labeling from the applicability of the []CSPA.” The trial court further found that", "paragraph_id": "para_68" }, { "text": "the State’s CSPA claims are impliedly preempted by the FDCA.", "paragraph_id": "para_69" }, { "text": "{¶8} The State has appealed, raising three assignments of error for our review. To", "paragraph_id": "para_70" }, { "text": "facilitate our analysis, we will consider the assignments of error out of order.", "paragraph_id": "para_71" }, { "text": "II.", "paragraph_id": "para_72" }, { "text": "ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR II", "paragraph_id": "para_73" }, { "text": "THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN HOLDING THE [STATE] IS", "paragraph_id": "para_74" }, { "text": "PROHIBITED FROM BRINGING THIS ACTION BY THE SAFE HARBOR", "paragraph_id": "para_75" }, { "text": "PROVISION OF THE CSPA[.]", "paragraph_id": "para_76" }, { "text": "{¶9} The State argues in its second assignment of error that the trial court erred when it", "paragraph_id": "para_77" }, { "text": "found the “safe harbor” provision of the CSPA protects Orrville Tobacco from the State’s", "paragraph_id": "para_78" }, { "text": "enforcement of the CSPA. The “safe harbor” provision of the CSPA provides that the CSPA does", "paragraph_id": "para_79" }, { "text": "4", "paragraph_id": "para_80" }, { "text": "not apply to “[a]n act or practice required or specifically permitted by or under federal law[.] R.C.", "paragraph_id": "para_81", "court_paragraph": 4 }, { "text": "1345.12(A). Orrville Tobacco argues that federal law requires all tobacco products, including", "paragraph_id": "para_82" }, { "text": "illegal unregulated vapes, to be labeled “sale only allowed in the United States.” Therefore,", "paragraph_id": "para_83" }, { "text": "Orrville Tobacco concludes, the CSPA does not apply to the State’s claims because the claims are", "paragraph_id": "para_84" }, { "text": "based on the label required by federal law.", "paragraph_id": "para_85" }, { "text": "{¶10} The FDCA, as amended by the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control", "paragraph_id": "para_86" }, { "text": "Act (“the Act”) in 2009, governs the manufacture, labeling, marketing, and sale of tobacco", "paragraph_id": "para_87" }, { "text": "products. See 21 U.S.C. 387, et seq. The Act “‘provides that all new tobacco products-those not", "paragraph_id": "para_88" }, { "text": "commercially marketed in the United States prior to February 2007-must be approved by the FDA", "paragraph_id": "para_89" }, { "text": "before being marketed to the public.’” Vape Cent. Group, LLC v. U.S. Food and Drug Admin.,", "paragraph_id": "para_90" }, { "text": "U.S.D.C. Slip. Op. No. 24-3354, 2025 WL 637416, *1 (Feb. 27, 2025), quoting Fontem US, LLC", "paragraph_id": "para_91" }, { "text": "v. U.S. Food & Drug Admin., 82 F.4th 1207, 1212 (D.C. Cir. 2023), citing 21 U.S.C. 387j. This", "paragraph_id": "para_92" }, { "text": "includes vapes. Id. New tobacco products that have not been FDA approved, including vapes, are", "paragraph_id": "para_93" }, { "text": "deemed “adulterated” and it is not legal to market and sell these products in the United States. 21", "paragraph_id": "para_94" }, { "text": "U.S.C. 387b(6)(A). 21 U.S.C. 387t(a)(1) states, in part, “the label, packaging, and shipping", "paragraph_id": "para_95" }, { "text": "containers of tobacco products other than cigarettes for introduction or delivery for introduction", "paragraph_id": "para_96" }, { "text": "into interstate commerce in the United States shall bear the statement ‘sale only allowed in the", "paragraph_id": "para_97" }, { "text": "United States.’”", "paragraph_id": "para_98" }, { "text": "{¶11} The State of Ohio has enacted consumer protection laws to protect Ohio consumers", "paragraph_id": "para_99" }, { "text": "from deceptive sales practices. The CSPA “was enacted in 1972 and prohibits suppliers from", "paragraph_id": "para_100" }, { "text": "committing unfair, deceptive, or unconscionable acts or practices in connection with consumer", "paragraph_id": "para_101" }, { "text": "transactions.” Krueck v. Youngstown State University, 2019-Ohio-3219, ¶ 13 (9th Dist.), citing", "paragraph_id": "para_102" }, { "text": "R.C. 1345.02 and R.C. 1345.03. The CSPA defines a “‘[s]upplier’ as “a seller . . . engaged in the", "paragraph_id": "para_103" }, { "text": "5", "paragraph_id": "para_104" }, { "text": "business of effecting or soliciting consumer transactions[.]” R.C. 1345.01(C). “Consumer", "paragraph_id": "para_105", "court_paragraph": 5 }, { "text": "transaction” is defined as “a sale . . . of any item of goods . . . to an individual for purposes that", "paragraph_id": "para_106" }, { "text": "are primarily personal . . . , or solicitation to supply any of these things.” R.C. 1345.01(A). There", "paragraph_id": "para_107" }, { "text": "is no dispute that Orrville Tobacco is a supplier that sells tobacco products including vapes not", "paragraph_id": "para_108" }, { "text": "authorized by the FDA.", "paragraph_id": "para_109" }, { "text": "{¶12} Here, the State is seeking to enforce the CSPA, alleging in its complaint that", "paragraph_id": "para_110" }, { "text": "Orrville Tobacco has committed unfair or deceptive acts in violation of the CSPA by failing to", "paragraph_id": "para_111" }, { "text": "clearly and conspicuously disclose that the products it offers for sale are not legal to be sold in the", "paragraph_id": "para_112" }, { "text": "United States or in Ohio and the label “sale only allowed in the United States” on illegal vape", "paragraph_id": "para_113" }, { "text": "products offered for sale by Orrville Tobacco takes advantage of the inability of Ohio consumers", "paragraph_id": "para_114" }, { "text": "to reasonably protect their interests as the consumers do not know that the products are not", "paragraph_id": "para_115" }, { "text": "authorized or legal to be sold in the United States. The State’s complaint also includes a claim", "paragraph_id": "para_116" }, { "text": "that Orrville Tobacco has violated portions of Ohio’s Administrative Code, including section", "paragraph_id": "para_117" }, { "text": "109:4-3-02(A)(1) (Exclusions and Limitations in Advertisements Rule) by failing to clearly and", "paragraph_id": "para_118" }, { "text": "conspicuously disclose that the vapes were not legal to be sold in the United States.", "paragraph_id": "para_119" }, { "text": "Civ.R. 12(B)(6)", "paragraph_id": "para_120" }, { "text": "{¶13} A Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion tests the sufficiency of the complaint, and dismissal is", "paragraph_id": "para_121" }, { "text": "appropriate where the complaint “fail[s] to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.” In", "paragraph_id": "para_122" }, { "text": "construing a motion to dismiss, the court must presume that all factual allegations of the complaint", "paragraph_id": "para_123" }, { "text": "are true and make all reasonable inferences in favor of the non-moving party. Mitchell v. Lawson", "paragraph_id": "para_124" }, { "text": "Milk Co., 40 Ohio St.3d 190, 192 (1988). Before the court may dismiss a complaint, it must appear", "paragraph_id": "para_125" }, { "text": "beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts entitling the plaintiff to relief. O’Brien v.", "paragraph_id": "para_126" }, { "text": "Univ. Community Tenants Union, Inc., 42 Ohio St.2d 242 (1975), syllabus.", "paragraph_id": "para_127" }, { "text": "6", "paragraph_id": "para_128" }, { "text": "{¶14} This Court reviews an order granting a Civ.R. 12(B)(6) motion to dismiss de novo.", "paragraph_id": "para_129", "court_paragraph": 6 }, { "text": "Perrysburg Twp. v. City of Rossford, 2004-Ohio-4362, ¶ 5. “Using a de novo standard, this Court", "paragraph_id": "para_130" }, { "text": "conducts an independent review of the trial court's decision, giving no deference to the trial court's", "paragraph_id": "para_131" }, { "text": "determination.” Jacobson v. Akron Children’s Hosp., 2023-Ohio-2225, ¶ 53 (9th Dist.).", "paragraph_id": "para_132" }, { "text": "Ohio’s Consumer Sales Practices Act Safe Harbor Provision", "paragraph_id": "para_133" }, { "text": "{¶15} The State brings its complaint against Orrville Tobacco pursuant to Ohio’s CSPA,", "paragraph_id": "para_134" }, { "text": "codified in R.C. Chapter 1345. R.C. 1345.12(A) states that “Sections 1345.01 to 1345.13 of the", "paragraph_id": "para_135" }, { "text": "Revised Code do not apply to . . . [a]n act or practice required or specifically permitted by or under", "paragraph_id": "para_136" }, { "text": "federal law . . . .” This provision, and similar provisions in other state consumer protection statutes,", "paragraph_id": "para_137" }, { "text": "has been referred to as a “safe harbor” provision. See In re Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co.", "paragraph_id": "para_138" }, { "text": "Marketing Sales Practices Liab. Litigation, 288 F.Supp.3d 1087, 1250 (D. New Mexico 2017).", "paragraph_id": "para_139" }, { "text": "{¶16} Orrville Tobacco’s argument is that Ohio law provides “safe harbor” because the", "paragraph_id": "para_140" }, { "text": "products it sells, including the illegal adulterated vapes, carry the federally required label “sale", "paragraph_id": "para_141" }, { "text": "only allowed in the United States.” We are mindful that this is the Civ.R. 12(B)(6) stage of the", "paragraph_id": "para_142" }, { "text": "proceedings and dismissal is appropriate only where the State can prove no set of facts entitling it", "paragraph_id": "para_143" }, { "text": "to relief. Further, we must presume that all factual allegations of the complaint are true and make", "paragraph_id": "para_144" }, { "text": "all reasonable inferences in favor of the State.", "paragraph_id": "para_145" }, { "text": "{¶17} Here, the State’s claims include the allegation that the illegal vapes offered for sale", "paragraph_id": "para_146" }, { "text": "by Orrville Tobacco carry a label that reads, “sale only allowed in the United States.” We must", "paragraph_id": "para_147" }, { "text": "presume that fact to be true. The complaint also alleges Orrville Tobacco has failed to clearly and", "paragraph_id": "para_148" }, { "text": "conspicuously disclose that the products it offers for sale are not legal to be sold in the United", "paragraph_id": "para_149" }, { "text": "States or in Ohio. We must also presume that fact to be true. The State further alleges that the", "paragraph_id": "para_150" }, { "text": "label “sale only allowed in the United States” on illegal vape products offered for sale by Orrville", "paragraph_id": "para_151" }, { "text": "7", "paragraph_id": "para_152" }, { "text": "Tobacco takes advantage of the inability of Ohio consumers to reasonably protect their interests", "paragraph_id": "para_153", "court_paragraph": 7 }, { "text": "as the consumers do not know that the products are not authorized or legal to be sold in the United", "paragraph_id": "para_154" }, { "text": "States. We must presume that fact to be true.", "paragraph_id": "para_155" }, { "text": "{¶18} The State’s complaint is not about the label. However, the label that states “sale", "paragraph_id": "para_156" }, { "text": "only allowed in the United States” is one of the circumstances surrounding Orrville Tobacco’s", "paragraph_id": "para_157" }, { "text": "allegedly deceptive sales practices. In its memorandum in opposition to Orrville Tobacco’s Civ.R.", "paragraph_id": "para_158" }, { "text": "12(B)(6) motion to dismiss, the State made clear it was not seeking to change the label on the", "paragraph_id": "para_159" }, { "text": "tobacco products. Rather, the State argued Orrville Tobacco could comply with Ohio’s consumer", "paragraph_id": "para_160" }, { "text": "protection law by not selling illegal adulterated vapes, or by displaying the products in a separate", "paragraph_id": "para_161" }, { "text": "section with signage indicating the vapes were unregulated by the FDA.", "paragraph_id": "para_162" }, { "text": "{¶19} In Burgett v. SD Orrville, LLC, 2025-Ohio-5837, ¶ 22 (9th Dist.), this Court recently", "paragraph_id": "para_163" }, { "text": "stated:", "paragraph_id": "para_164" }, { "text": "“It is how the consumer views the act or statement which determines whether it is", "paragraph_id": "para_165" }, { "text": "unfair or deceptive.” Frey v. Vin Devers, Inc. 80 Ohio App.3d 1, 6 (6th Dist. 1992).", "paragraph_id": "para_166" }, { "text": "Consequently, “[i]f the supplier does or says something, regardless of intent, which", "paragraph_id": "para_167" }, { "text": "has the likelihood of inducing in the mind of the consumer a belief which is not in", "paragraph_id": "para_168" }, { "text": "accord with the facts, then the act or statement is deceptive.” Id.", "paragraph_id": "para_169" }, { "text": "A consumer could reasonably view Orrville Tobacco’s actions as deceptive because the acts have", "paragraph_id": "para_170" }, { "text": "the likelihood of inducing in the mind of a consumer a belief which is not in accord with the facts,", "paragraph_id": "para_171" }, { "text": "and that belief is that the illegal unregulated adulterated products are legal, when they are not. The", "paragraph_id": "para_172" }, { "text": "deceptive action alleged here is not the label “sale only allowed in the United States.” This label", "paragraph_id": "para_173" }, { "text": "appears to be pre-printed on the packaging of the illegal vapes according to the attachments to the", "paragraph_id": "para_174" }, { "text": "State’s complaint. When reviewing the complaint, we may also review the material incorporated", "paragraph_id": "para_175" }, { "text": "into the complaint and it is considered as part of the complaint for purposes of considering a Civ.R.", "paragraph_id": "para_176" }, { "text": "12(B)(6) motion to dismiss. State ex rel. Edwards v. Toledo City School Dist. Bd. of Edn., 72 Ohio", "paragraph_id": "para_177" }, { "text": "8", "paragraph_id": "para_178" }, { "text": "St.3d 106, 109 (1995). The actions of Orrville Tobacco alleged to be deceptive are that Orrville", "paragraph_id": "para_179", "court_paragraph": 8 }, { "text": "Tobacco is selling illegal unregulated adulterated vapes without informing consumers the", "paragraph_id": "para_180" }, { "text": "unregulated vapes are in fact illegal and adulterated and not allowed to be sold in the United States", "paragraph_id": "para_181" }, { "text": "or Ohio. Nothing in the federal law requires Orrville Tobacco to sell these illegal unregulated", "paragraph_id": "para_182" }, { "text": "adulterated products. Further, nothing in the labeling requirement for tobacco products prevents", "paragraph_id": "para_183" }, { "text": "Orrville Tobacco from disclosing to consumers that, irrespective of the label, the unauthorized", "paragraph_id": "para_184" }, { "text": "vapes it sells are illegal and adulterated.", "paragraph_id": "para_185" }, { "text": "{¶20} In addition, it is unclear at this stage of the proceedings whether the Food and Drug", "paragraph_id": "para_186" }, { "text": "Administration actually requires unauthorized and illegal vapes to be labeled “sale only allowed", "paragraph_id": "para_187" }, { "text": "in the United States.” See State ex rel. Yost v. Central Tobacco and Stuff, Inc., 2025-Ohio-4613, ¶", "paragraph_id": "para_188" }, { "text": "57 (5th Dist.) (King, J., dissenting), appeal accepted, 2026-Ohio-475. Orrville Tobacco argues it", "paragraph_id": "para_189" }, { "text": "should be permitted to sell and promote the illegal unregulated vapes without disclosing they are", "paragraph_id": "para_190" }, { "text": "illegal and unregulated so long as the illegal vapes carry the label “sale only allowed in the United", "paragraph_id": "para_191" }, { "text": "States.” Such an interpretation of federal law would mean Congress intended to allow a product", "paragraph_id": "para_192" }, { "text": "that is not allowed to be sold in the United States to be promoted and sold by retailers as if it is", "paragraph_id": "para_193" }, { "text": "allowed to be sold in the United States. It defies common sense that the FDCA can be used to", "paragraph_id": "para_194" }, { "text": "shield sellers of illegal unregulated adulterated tobacco products from a state’s consumer", "paragraph_id": "para_195" }, { "text": "protection laws. This would be an absurd result, and the law need not and should not endorse an", "paragraph_id": "para_196" }, { "text": "absurd result. State ex rel. Walker v. Bolin, 2024-Ohio-5126, ¶ 18 (Brunner, J., dissenting).", "paragraph_id": "para_197" }, { "text": "The primary goal of statutory interpretation is to determine and give effect to the", "paragraph_id": "para_198" }, { "text": "intent of the legislature. Christe v. GMS Mgt. Co., Inc., 88 Ohio St.3d 376, 377 . . .", "paragraph_id": "para_199" }, { "text": "(2000). We seek first to determine legislative intent from the plain language of a", "paragraph_id": "para_200" }, { "text": "statute, Summerville v. Forest Park, . . . 2010-Ohio-6280, . . . ¶ 18, the general rule", "paragraph_id": "para_201" }, { "text": "being that “[i]f the meaning of the statute is unambiguous and definite, it must be", "paragraph_id": "para_202" }, { "text": "applied as written and no further interpretation is necessary,” State ex rel. Savarese", "paragraph_id": "para_203" }, { "text": "v. Buckeye Local School Dist. Bd. of Edn., 74 Ohio St.3d 543, 545 . . . (1996). An", "paragraph_id": "para_204" }, { "text": "exception to the plain-language rule exists, however, when the plain language of", "paragraph_id": "para_205" }, { "text": "9", "paragraph_id": "para_206" }, { "text": "the statute would lead to absurd results that the legislature obviously did not intend.", "paragraph_id": "para_207", "court_paragraph": 9 }, { "text": "State ex rel. Clay v. Cuyahoga Cty. Med. Examiner’s Office, . . . 2017 Ohio-8714, .", "paragraph_id": "para_208" }, { "text": ". . ¶ 22[.]", "paragraph_id": "para_209" }, { "text": "Diller v. Diller, 2023-Ohio-1508, ¶ 16 (Stewart, J., dissenting.) See, also, Donovan v. FirstCredit,", "paragraph_id": "para_210" }, { "text": "Inc., 983 F.3d 246, 254 (6th Cir. 2020).", "paragraph_id": "para_211" }, { "text": "{¶21} Federal tobacco laws are expressly for the “protection of the public health.” See 21", "paragraph_id": "para_212" }, { "text": "U.S.C. 387j(c)(2)(A), (c)(4), (c)(5), (d)(1)(a). Interpreting federal and state law in a way that", "paragraph_id": "para_213" }, { "text": "allows the selling, advertising, and promotion of an illegal adulterated product that is inhaled into", "paragraph_id": "para_214" }, { "text": "a person’s lungs so long as it is labeled “sale only allowed in the United States,” without disclosing", "paragraph_id": "para_215" }, { "text": "that the product is in fact illegal and adulterated does not protect the public health. Interpreting", "paragraph_id": "para_216" }, { "text": "federal tobacco regulatory law and Ohio’s CSPA in a way that allows illegal vapes to be sold", "paragraph_id": "para_217" }, { "text": "without the seller disclosing that they are illegal misleads the public to believe the illegal vapes", "paragraph_id": "para_218" }, { "text": "have undergone the same scrutiny and regulatory process as legal tobacco products. The danger", "paragraph_id": "para_219" }, { "text": "lies in not knowing whether the illegal unregulated adulterated vapes would have passed regulatory", "paragraph_id": "para_220" }, { "text": "muster. It is unknown whether the process may have weeded out some of the unregulated products", "paragraph_id": "para_221" }, { "text": "altogether to protect the public health.", "paragraph_id": "para_222" }, { "text": "{¶22} Presuming all factual allegations of the State’s complaint to be true and making all", "paragraph_id": "para_223" }, { "text": "reasonable inferences in favor of the State, we cannot say the State’s claims against Orrville", "paragraph_id": "para_224" }, { "text": "Tobacco are barred by the “safe harbor” provision of the CSPA. The State’s complaint therefore", "paragraph_id": "para_225" }, { "text": "does state a claim or claims upon which relief can be granted.", "paragraph_id": "para_226" }, { "text": "{¶23} Accordingly, the State’s second assignment of error is sustained.", "paragraph_id": "para_227" }, { "text": "ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR III", "paragraph_id": "para_228" }, { "text": "THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN GRANTING [ORRVILLE TOBACCO’S]", "paragraph_id": "para_229" }, { "text": "MOTION TO DISMISS FINDING THAT THE STATE OF OHIO IS", "paragraph_id": "para_230" }, { "text": "PREEMPTED FROM ENFORCING THE CSPA.", "paragraph_id": "para_231" }, { "text": "10", "paragraph_id": "para_232" }, { "text": "{¶24} “Under the Supremacy Clause [of the United States Constitution], the United States", "paragraph_id": "para_233", "court_paragraph": 10 }, { "text": "Congress has the power to preempt state law.” State ex rel. Yost v. Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft,", "paragraph_id": "para_234" }, { "text": "2021-Ohio-2121, ¶ 11. Federal preemption can be express or implied. Id. Here, the trial court", "paragraph_id": "para_235" }, { "text": "found the State’s claims were impliedly preempted by federal law. When Congress expressly", "paragraph_id": "para_236" }, { "text": "preempts state law, it explicitly says so with clear statutory language. English v. Gen. Elec. Co.,", "paragraph_id": "para_237" }, { "text": "496 U.S. 72, 78-79 (1990). However, when considering whether preemption is implied, courts", "paragraph_id": "para_238" }, { "text": "look to congressional intent to determine whether Congress meant to preempt state law without", "paragraph_id": "para_239" }, { "text": "saying as much. See id. at 79. As stated above, Congress enacted federal tobacco laws for the", "paragraph_id": "para_240" }, { "text": "“protection of the public health.” See 21 U.S.C. 387j(c)(2)(A), (c)(4), (c)(5), (d)(1)(a).", "paragraph_id": "para_241" }, { "text": "{¶25} Orrville Tobacco argues federal law prohibits states from enacting requirements", "paragraph_id": "para_242" }, { "text": "concerning the labeling of tobacco products and because the State’s complaint alleges the vapes", "paragraph_id": "para_243" }, { "text": "sold by Orrville Tobacco carry the label “sale only allowed in the United States,” the State’s claims", "paragraph_id": "para_244" }, { "text": "are preempted.", "paragraph_id": "para_245" }, { "text": "{¶26} 21 U.S.C. 387p(a)(2)(A) provides:", "paragraph_id": "para_246" }, { "text": "No state or political subdivision of a State may establish or continue in effect with", "paragraph_id": "para_247" }, { "text": "respect to a tobacco product any requirement which is different from, or in addition", "paragraph_id": "para_248" }, { "text": "to, any requirement under the provisions of this subchapter relating to tobacco", "paragraph_id": "para_249" }, { "text": "product standards, premarket review, adulteration, misbranding, labeling,", "paragraph_id": "para_250" }, { "text": "registration, good manufacturing standards, or modified risk tobacco products.", "paragraph_id": "para_251" }, { "text": "(Emphasis added.) However, 21 U.S.C. 387p(a)(1) provides in part:", "paragraph_id": "para_252" }, { "text": "Except as provided in paragraph (2)(A), nothing in this subchapter, or rules", "paragraph_id": "para_253" }, { "text": "promulgated under this subchapter, shall be construed to limit . . . a State . . . to", "paragraph_id": "para_254" }, { "text": "enact, adopt, promulgate, and enforce any law, rule, regulation, or other measure", "paragraph_id": "para_255" }, { "text": "with respect to tobacco products that is in addition to, or more stringent than,", "paragraph_id": "para_256" }, { "text": "requirements established under this subchapter, including a law, rule, regulation, or", "paragraph_id": "para_257" }, { "text": "other measure relating to or prohibiting the sale, distribution, possession, exposure", "paragraph_id": "para_258" }, { "text": "to, access to, advertising and promotion of, or use of tobacco products by", "paragraph_id": "para_259" }, { "text": "individuals of any age, information reporting to the State, or measures relating to", "paragraph_id": "para_260" }, { "text": "fire safety standards for tobacco products.", "paragraph_id": "para_261" }, { "text": "11", "paragraph_id": "para_262" }, { "text": "(Emphasis added.)", "paragraph_id": "para_263", "court_paragraph": 11 }, { "text": "{¶27} Therefore, federal law expressly allows states to enforce laws or measures with", "paragraph_id": "para_264" }, { "text": "respect to tobacco products relating to the sale, distribution, advertising, or promotion of tobacco", "paragraph_id": "para_265" }, { "text": "products. See, also, Vapor Technology Assn. v. Wooten, 2025 WL 1787420, *5 (E.D. North", "paragraph_id": "para_266" }, { "text": "Carolina Jun. 27, 2025) (“the text [of 21 U.S.C. § 387p(a)(1)] reiterates that the Preemption Clause", "paragraph_id": "para_267" }, { "text": "‘does not apply to requirements relating to the sale . . . the advertising and promotion of, or use of,", "paragraph_id": "para_268" }, { "text": "tobacco products.’”); National Association of Tobacco Outlets, Inc. v. City of Providence, R.I., 731", "paragraph_id": "para_269" }, { "text": "F.3d 71, 85 (1st Cir. 2013) (ordinance concerning coupon redemption for tobacco products not", "paragraph_id": "para_270" }, { "text": "preempted); R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Cty. of Los Angeles, 29 F.4th 542, 552 (9th Cir. 2022)", "paragraph_id": "para_271" }, { "text": "(ban of flavored tobacco products not preempted); and R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. City of Edina,", "paragraph_id": "para_272" }, { "text": "60 F.4th 1170, 1173 (8th Cir. 2023) (ban of sale of flavored tobacco products not preempted.).", "paragraph_id": "para_273" }, { "text": "“Tobacco product regulation has long been subject to state authority[.]” Wisconsinites for", "paragraph_id": "para_274" }, { "text": "Alternatives to Smoking & Tobacco, Inc. v. Casey, 2025 WL 2582099, *6 (W.D. Wisconsin Sep.", "paragraph_id": "para_275" }, { "text": "5, 2025). When Congress enacted the Tobacco Control Act in 2009, it expressly reserved", "paragraph_id": "para_276" }, { "text": "substantial regulatory authority to the States. Id. at *5.", "paragraph_id": "para_277" }, { "text": "{¶28} “The modern preemption doctrine recognizes broad authority of the federal and", "paragraph_id": "para_278" }, { "text": "state governments to concurrently regulate the same subject.” Central Tobacco, 2025-Ohio-4613", "paragraph_id": "para_279" }, { "text": "at ¶ 53 (King, J., dissenting), citing National Solid Wastes Management Association v. Killian, 918", "paragraph_id": "para_280" }, { "text": "F.2d 671, 686 (7th Cir. 1990) (Easterbrook, J., dubitante) “Thus, the mere existence of legislation", "paragraph_id": "para_281" }, { "text": "at both levels is alone insufficient to preempt state law.” Central Tobacco at ¶ 53 (King, J.,", "paragraph_id": "para_282" }, { "text": "dissenting). “Preemption analysis is guided by the presumption that a federal statute does not", "paragraph_id": "para_283" }, { "text": "displace local law ‘unless Congress has made such an intention clear and manifest.’” U.S.", "paragraph_id": "para_284" }, { "text": "Smokeless Tobacco Manufacturing Co. LLC v. City of New York, 708 F.3d 428, 432 (2d Cir. 2013),", "paragraph_id": "para_285" }, { "text": "12", "paragraph_id": "para_286" }, { "text": "quoting Bates v. Dow Agrosciences LLC, 544 U.S. 431, 449 (2005). This assumption is", "paragraph_id": "para_287", "court_paragraph": 12 }, { "text": "particularly strong where a state or locality seeks to exercise its police powers to protect the health", "paragraph_id": "para_288" }, { "text": "and safety of its citizens. Id. Here the State’s claims are “implicitly centered on health and safety", "paragraph_id": "para_289" }, { "text": "concerns of an unregulated product being offered for sale in a deceptive manner to unaware", "paragraph_id": "para_290" }, { "text": "consumers.” (Emphasis added.) See Central Tobacco at ¶ 58 (King, J., dissenting). Therefore, the", "paragraph_id": "para_291" }, { "text": "State’s claims fall squarely within Ohio’s police powers and do not conflict with, and are in fact", "paragraph_id": "para_292" }, { "text": "consistent with, Congress’s intent to protect the public health and Congress’s express reservation", "paragraph_id": "para_293" }, { "text": "of authority to the states to enact and enforce laws “relating to or prohibiting the sale, distribution,", "paragraph_id": "para_294" }, { "text": "possession, exposure to, access to, advertising and promotion of, or use of tobacco products.” 21", "paragraph_id": "para_295" }, { "text": "U.S.C. 387p(a)(1).", "paragraph_id": "para_296" }, { "text": "{¶29} The State is not seeking to have Orrville Tobacco remove or alter the label or add", "paragraph_id": "para_297" }, { "text": "a label to the vape packaging. Instead, the State seeks an order requiring Orrville Tobacco to", "paragraph_id": "para_298" }, { "text": "disclose that the illegal unregulated adulterated vapes are illegal and unauthorized because the", "paragraph_id": "para_299" }, { "text": "label on the packaging, without further information, would lead unaware consumers to believe the", "paragraph_id": "para_300" }, { "text": "product was legal. Nothing in the FDCA prohibits the State from requiring Orrville Tobacco to", "paragraph_id": "para_301" }, { "text": "clearly and conspicuously disclose in its sale and promotion of unauthorized vape products that", "paragraph_id": "para_302" }, { "text": "the unauthorized vapes are unregulated, illegal, and adulterated.", "paragraph_id": "para_303" }, { "text": "{¶30} If in fact federal law does require illegal vapes to carry the label “sale only allowed", "paragraph_id": "para_304" }, { "text": "in the United States,” it is possible for Orrville Tobacco to comply with the federal labeling", "paragraph_id": "para_305" }, { "text": "requirement and comply with the CSPA. “[I]f there is any ambiguity as to whether the local and", "paragraph_id": "para_306" }, { "text": "federal laws can coexist, we must uphold [state or local law].” See U.S. Smokeless Tobacco, 708", "paragraph_id": "para_307" }, { "text": "F.3d 428 at 433. Orrville Tobacco could comply with Ohio’s consumer protection law by not", "paragraph_id": "para_308" }, { "text": "13", "paragraph_id": "para_309" }, { "text": "selling illegal unregulated adulterated vapes, or by displaying the products in a separate section", "paragraph_id": "para_310", "court_paragraph": 13 }, { "text": "with signage indicating the vapes are unregulated by the FDA.", "paragraph_id": "para_311" }, { "text": "{¶31} Again, this is the Civ.R. 12(B)(6) stage of the proceedings and we are mindful that", "paragraph_id": "para_312" }, { "text": "it must appear beyond doubt that the State can prove no set of facts entitling it to relief before the", "paragraph_id": "para_313" }, { "text": "State’s complaint can be dismissed. Here, the State has alleged facts that, if proven, would entitle", "paragraph_id": "para_314" }, { "text": "the State to the relief it seeks and the State’s claims are not clearly preempted by federal law.", "paragraph_id": "para_315" }, { "text": "{¶32} Accordingly, the State’s third assignment of error is sustained.", "paragraph_id": "para_316" }, { "text": "ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR I", "paragraph_id": "para_317" }, { "text": "THE TRIAL COURT ERRED RELYING ON EXTRINSIC EVIDENCE", "paragraph_id": "para_318" }, { "text": "OUTSIDE THE COMPLAINT WHEN RULING ON A C[IV].R. 12(B)(6)", "paragraph_id": "para_319" }, { "text": "MOTION TO DISMISS[.]", "paragraph_id": "para_320" }, { "text": "{¶33} Our resolution of the State’s second and third assignments of error renders this", "paragraph_id": "para_321" }, { "text": "assignment of error moot pursuant to App.R. 12(A)(1)(c).", "paragraph_id": "para_322" }, { "text": "{¶34} Accordingly, the State’s first assignment of error is moot.", "paragraph_id": "para_323" }, { "text": "III.", "paragraph_id": "para_324" }, { "text": "{¶35} Based on the foregoing, the State’s first assignment of error is moot and its second", "paragraph_id": "para_325" }, { "text": "and third assignments of error are sustained. The judgment of the Wayne County Court of", "paragraph_id": "para_326" }, { "text": "Common Pleas is reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this decision.", "paragraph_id": "para_327" }, { "text": "Judgment reversed.", "paragraph_id": "para_328" }, { "text": "There were reasonable grounds for this appeal.", "paragraph_id": "para_329" }, { "text": "14", "paragraph_id": "para_330" }, { "text": "We order that a special mandate issue out of this Court, directing the Court of Common", "paragraph_id": "para_331", "court_paragraph": 14 }, { "text": "Pleas, County of Wayne, State of Ohio, to carry this judgment into execution. A certified copy of", "paragraph_id": "para_332" }, { "text": "this journal entry shall constitute the mandate, pursuant to App.R. 27.", "paragraph_id": "para_333" }, { "text": "Immediately upon the filing hereof, this document shall constitute the journal entry of", "paragraph_id": "para_334" }, { "text": "judgment, and it shall be file stamped by the Clerk of the Court of Appeals at which time the period", "paragraph_id": "para_335" }, { "text": "for review shall begin to run. App.R. 22(C). The Clerk of the Court of Appeals is instructed to", "paragraph_id": "para_336" }, { "text": "mail a notice of entry of this judgment to the parties and to make a notation of the mailing in the", "paragraph_id": "para_337" }, { "text": "docket, pursuant to App.R. 30.", "paragraph_id": "para_338" }, { "text": "Costs taxed to Appellee.", "paragraph_id": "para_339" }, { "text": "BETTY SUTTON", "paragraph_id": "para_340" }, { "text": "FOR THE COURT", "paragraph_id": "para_341" }, { "text": "HENSAL, P. J.", "paragraph_id": "para_342" }, { "text": "CONCURS.", "paragraph_id": "para_343" }, { "text": "STEVENSON, J.", "paragraph_id": "para_344" }, { "text": "DISSENTING.", "paragraph_id": "para_345" }, { "text": "{¶36} I would respectfully dissent from the majority’s decision regarding Assignment of", "paragraph_id": "para_346" }, { "text": "Error III in this case. This case involves difficult questions regarding the State’s ability to use the", "paragraph_id": "para_347" }, { "text": "CSPA to challenge the sale of vape products required to be labeled under federal law. The trial", "paragraph_id": "para_348" }, { "text": "court found that federal law preempted the State’s attempt to utilize the CSPA in this instance. The", "paragraph_id": "para_349" }, { "text": "majority reverses that decision. I would affirm, and for brevity’s sake, just note that I agree with", "paragraph_id": "para_350" }, { "text": "the majority opinions in State ex rel. Yost v. Cent. Tobacco and Stuff Inc., 2025-Ohio-4613 (5th", "paragraph_id": "para_351" }, { "text": "Dist.) and State ex rel. Yost v. Elevate Smoke, LLC, 2025-Ohio-5652, ¶ 72. (1st Dist.), two recent", "paragraph_id": "para_352" }, { "text": "15", "paragraph_id": "para_353" }, { "text": "cases that considered this exact issue of preemption. I note that the Ohio Supreme Court has", "paragraph_id": "para_354", "court_paragraph": 15 }, { "text": "accepted jurisdiction in State ex. rel. Yost v. Cent. Tobacco and Stuff Inc., 2026-Ohio-475, and", "paragraph_id": "para_355" }, { "text": "welcome the Court’s consideration of these conflicting decisions.", "paragraph_id": "para_356" }, { "text": "{¶37} The trial court also dismissed the State’s complaint based on the CSPA’s safe", "paragraph_id": "para_357" }, { "text": "harbor provision. Neither the First nor Fifth District cases discussed the application of the CSPA’s", "paragraph_id": "para_358" }, { "text": "safe harbor provision to the State’s complaint in those cases. R.C. 1345.12(A) of the CSPA states", "paragraph_id": "para_359" }, { "text": "that “Sections 1345.01 to 1345.13 of the Revised Code do not apply to . . . [a]n act or practice", "paragraph_id": "para_360" }, { "text": "required or specifically permitted by or under federal law . . . .” This provision, and similar", "paragraph_id": "para_361" }, { "text": "provisions in other state consumer protection statutes, has been referred to as a “safe harbor”", "paragraph_id": "para_362" }, { "text": "provision. See In re Santa Fe Natural Tobacco Co. Marketing Sales Practices Liab. Litigation,", "paragraph_id": "para_363" }, { "text": "288 F.Supp.3d 1087, 1250-1251 (D. New Mexico 2017).", "paragraph_id": "para_364" }, { "text": "{¶38} The State alleges in its complaint that Orrville Tobacco violated the CSPA,", "paragraph_id": "para_365" }, { "text": "specifically R.C. 1345.02(A)/(B) and R.C. 1345.03(A)/(B). It contends that Orrville Tobacco", "paragraph_id": "para_366" }, { "text": "engaged in deceptive, misleading, and unconscionable acts when it sold illegal vapes with the label", "paragraph_id": "para_367" }, { "text": "“sale only allowed in the United States[.]” The FDCA as amended by the Tobacco Control Act", "paragraph_id": "para_368" }, { "text": "(“TCA”), however, requires that “the label, packaging, and shipping containers of cigarettes . . .", "paragraph_id": "para_369" }, { "text": "bear the statement ‘Sale only allowed in the United States[.]’” 21 U.S.C. 387t(a)(1). The FDCA", "paragraph_id": "para_370" }, { "text": "prohibits a state from establishing a labeling requirement that is in addition to or different from its", "paragraph_id": "para_371" }, { "text": "regulations. It expressly provides that:", "paragraph_id": "para_372" }, { "text": "No state or political subdivision of a State may establish or continue in effect", "paragraph_id": "para_373" }, { "text": "with respect to a tobacco product any requirement which is different from, or", "paragraph_id": "para_374" }, { "text": "in addition to, any requirement under the provisions of this subchapter relating", "paragraph_id": "para_375" }, { "text": "to tobacco product standards, premarket review, adulteration, misbranding,", "paragraph_id": "para_376" }, { "text": "labeling, registration, good manufacturing standards, or modified risk tobacco", "paragraph_id": "para_377" }, { "text": "products.", "paragraph_id": "para_378" }, { "text": "21 U.S.C. 387p(a)(2)(A).", "paragraph_id": "para_379" }, { "text": "16", "paragraph_id": "para_380" }, { "text": "{¶39} The State contends that Orrville Tobacco has committed unfair or deceptive acts or", "paragraph_id": "para_381", "court_paragraph": 16 }, { "text": "practices in violation of Ohio’s CSPA by offering for sale and selling illegal vapes with this label.", "paragraph_id": "para_382" }, { "text": "The State maintains that Orrville Tobacco (1) represents that the illegal vapes “have sponsorship", "paragraph_id": "para_383" }, { "text": "or approval” when it offers for sale and sells illegal vapes with this label; (2) “knowingly tak[es]", "paragraph_id": "para_384" }, { "text": "advantage of . . . consumers” by placing this label on illegal vapes; and (3) fails to disclose the", "paragraph_id": "para_385" }, { "text": "illegality of certain vapes with the placement of this required label. It further alleges that Orrville", "paragraph_id": "para_386" }, { "text": "Tobacco leads consumers to believe that it possesses or has a reasonable basis to believe that its", "paragraph_id": "para_387" }, { "text": "representations are true when it places the label on the illegal vapes that it offers for sale and sells.", "paragraph_id": "para_388" }, { "text": "The State’s claims are all based on the FDCA required “[s]ale only allowed in the United States”", "paragraph_id": "para_389" }, { "text": "label, as amended by the TCA. 21 U.S.C. 387t(a)(1). By the plain terms of the FDCA, Orrville", "paragraph_id": "para_390" }, { "text": "Tobacco cannot sell these products without including that label. Cent. Tobacco and Stuff Inc.,", "paragraph_id": "para_391" }, { "text": "2025-Ohio-4613, at ¶ 45 (5th Dist.) (“The FDCA requires all tobacco products affix this label, not", "paragraph_id": "para_392" }, { "text": "just those that have been authorized.”). Thus, under R.C. 1345.12(A) of the CSPA, this label is a", "paragraph_id": "para_393" }, { "text": "requirement of the FDCA and the CSPA’s safe harbor provision applies. Further, the State cannot", "paragraph_id": "para_394" }, { "text": "require the products to be sold without this label or some other warning, as the State would be", "paragraph_id": "para_395" }, { "text": "establishing a label requirement that is different from the regulation in the FDCA.", "paragraph_id": "para_396" }, { "text": "{¶40} Because the State’s claims are based on a label that federal law mandates Orrville", "paragraph_id": "para_397" }, { "text": "Tobacco to place on the vapes it sells, I would conclude that the trial court did not err when it", "paragraph_id": "para_398" }, { "text": "determined that the safe harbor provision of the CSPA as found in R.C. 1345.12(A) applies.", "paragraph_id": "para_399" }, { "text": "Accordingly, I also respectfully dissent from the majority’s decision as to Assignment of Error II.", "paragraph_id": "para_400" }, { "text": "17", "paragraph_id": "para_401" }, { "text": "APPEARANCES:", "paragraph_id": "para_402", "court_paragraph": 17 }, { "text": "DREW SMITH, Senior Assistant Attorney General, for Appellant.", "paragraph_id": "para_403" }, { "text": "ERIC N. HEYER and JAMES C. FRASER, Attorneys at Law, for Appellee.", "paragraph_id": "para_404" }, { "text": "GREGORY P. FELDKAMP, Attorney at Law, for Appellee.", "paragraph_id": "para_405" } ], "word_count": 5050, "cites": [ "496 U.S. 72", "544 U.S. 431", "82 F.4th 1207", "983 F.3d 246", "731\nF.3d 71", "29 F.4th 542", "60 F.4th 1170", "918\nF.2d 671", "708 F.3d 428", "708\nF.3d 428" ], "cited_by": [], "sha256": "aa7e78403616b59fd1d65bcdc5c7ffcb9c7920a58780f1885a1b995f27d726dd", "source_url": "https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/rod/docs/pdf/9/2026/2026-Ohio-983.pdf", "fetched_at": "2026-10-08T07:37:57.275+00:00", "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/ai/judgments/us/ohioctapp-25ap0011-2026-03-23", "risk_graph": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ohioctapp-25ap0011-2026-03-23", "relations_graph": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ohioctapp-25ap0011-2026-03-23", "changes": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/changes", "agent": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/us-praxis/agent?id=us:ohioctapp-25ap0011-2026-03-23", "verification": { "stored_sha256": "aa7e78403616b59fd1d65bcdc5c7ffcb9c7920a58780f1885a1b995f27d726dd", "recomputed_sha256": "aa7e78403616b59fd1d65bcdc5c7ffcb9c7920a58780f1885a1b995f27d726dd", "intact": true, "checked_at": "2026-10-09T04:59:20.120Z" } }, "hash": "sha256:8d6f2968414b0ae55647140b5acde835b4cd1e992a1bf5e57fb09c253e6d0710", "version": "legal-2026-10-09", "expires": "2026-10-10T00:00:00.000Z", "dependency": { "index_version": "legal-2026-10-09+legal-2026-10-09+2026-10-09T02:00:51", "content_hash": "sha256:8d6f2968414b0ae55647140b5acde835b4cd1e992a1bf5e57fb09c253e6d0710", "revalidate_after": "2026-10-09T05:59:20.898Z", "max_copy_age_seconds": 3600, "policy": "revalidate-required; attribution-preferred", "changelog": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/dependency", "verify": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/verify", "stale_copy_invalid": true }, "canonical": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/judgment-text?id=us:ohioctapp-25ap0011-2026-03-23", "follow": [ { "rel": "risk", "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/risk?id=us:ohioctapp-25ap0011-2026-03-23" }, { "rel": "relations", "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/relations?id=us:ohioctapp-25ap0011-2026-03-23" }, { "rel": "obligations", "href": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/obligation-chain" } ], "disclaimer": "Source reference with official identifier. Not legal advice and not a compliance decision.", "content_notice": { "legal_advice": false, "nature": "Source register. Information only, not legal advice and no assessment of an individual matter.", "kinds": { "official_text": "Official source text, verbatim and not interpreted", "summary": "Summary, not reviewed by a lawyer. Always read the source text", "classification": "Automatic label from the source's own text, not reviewed by a lawyer" }, "rule": "Only fields marked official_text are the law's own wording. Everything else points to it.", "report_error": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/corrections", "ai_act_declaration": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/api/public/v1/ai-act-declaration" }, "usageInfo": "https://legal.exploreworldai.com/citering" }