Gorran v. Atkins Nutritionals, Inc.
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
464 F. Supp. 2d 315 (2006)

- Written by Emily Laird, JD
Facts
Jody Gorran (plaintiff) started the Atkins diet, a weight-loss diet, in 2001. When Gorran began the diet, his cholesterol was 146 and he had a low risk of heart disease. After following the Atkins diet for two months, Gorran’s cholesterol was 230. Despite his skyrocketing cholesterol, Gorran opted to continue following the diet. In 2003 Gorran experienced chest pain, and he then underwent an angioplasty to unclog his artery and place a stent. Gorran sued Atkins Nutritionals, Inc., and the executor of the estate of Robert C. Atkins, M.D., (collectively, the Atkins company) (defendants). Gorran sued the Atkins company for products liability, arguing the Atkins company’s diet book was defective because its high-protein, low-carbohydrate, high-fat diet plan could increase the risk of heart disease, stroke, cancer, and diabetes. Gorran also alleged that the Atkins company’s food products were unreasonably dangerous. Gorran consumed only $25 worth of the Atkins company’s food products, including protein bars, pancake mix, and pancake syrup. The Atkins company filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings in the district court, arguing Gorran had failed to state a claim. The Atkins company contended that its book was not a product for purposes of products liability and that its food products were not defective.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Chin, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.