Judge Sarah Evans Barker’s ruling, last June 30, that Indiana’s e-liquid regulations were not unconstitutional a denied Motion for Preliminary Injunction filed earlier by e-liquid companies while granting the cross-motion for summary judgment introduced by the Indiana Alcohol and Tobacco Commission (headed by David Cook).

A Motion for Summary Judgment, a request for the court to rule that the other party has no case because there are no facts at issue, was introduced before the Court of Indiana last May by:

  • Legato Vapors, LLC,
  • Jet Setter Juice, LLC,
  • Rocky Mountain Ecigs, LLC,
  • Derb E Cigs Indiana, LLC,
  • the Right to Be SmokeFree Coalition, Inc (Intervenor-Petitioner)

In this lawsuit, the e-liquid companies making also the motion for preliminary injunction were claiming that either the case should not go before a jury at all, or a jury could only rule in their favor. A proposition that the judge denied as moot.

An appeal filed in the 7th Circuit by e-liquid companies and the Right 2 Be Smoke Free

In contrast, on the same day and in the same Court, Chief Judge Richard L. Young allowed GoodCat, LLC to continue its vaping business for 14 days and deemed the Indiana’s e-liquid regulation unconstitutional. The court, further granted GoodCat’s Motion for a Preliminary Injunction on August 19 and allowed GoodCat, LLC to continue its business in Indiana “until GoodCat’s claims reach final disposition.”

The difference between the two judgments is probably at the origin of the appeal by the e-liquid companies whose business with Indiana has not been allowed by the justice.

Indiana: Manufacturing permit granted to out-of-state company after a legal action




Previous articlePamela Gorman appointed by SFATA to replace Cynthia Cabrera
Next articleNZ : appeal to authorities to review certain vape laws as part of their “Smoke free” campaign
PhD in science and journalist for the Vaping Post. Specialised in scientific topics.