Burger King Corp. faces a civil-rights lawsuit after an employee at a Boston location accused a man of trying to pay for food with an allegedly counterfeit $10 bill, refused to return the bill and called the police when the man would not leave the restaurant. Ellis v. Burger King Corp., No. 1884-CV-01489 (Mass. Super. Ct., Suffolk Cty., filed May 14, 2018). The plaintiff, who is homeless and black, alleges that when he was arraigned, he was charged with possession of counterfeit notes and a probation violation and was subsequently held without bail from November 12, 2015, until February 19, 2016. He was reportedly released when the U.S. Secret Service notified the prosecutor that the $10 bill was authentic and not counterfeit. Burger King allegedly did not return the $10 bill to the man. Claiming conversion, defamation, negligence and violation of the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act, the plaintiff seeks attorney's fees and $950,000…
Category Archives 1st Circuit
A consumer has filed a putative class action alleging New England Coffee Company (NECC) mislabels its Hazelnut Crème Coffee by failing to include a front-label disclosure that the product contains natural and artificial flavors. Dumont v. Reily Foods Co., No. 18-10907 (D. Mass., filed May 7, 2018). "Rather, buried on the back side of the label in the far-left corner in tiny print was the only indication that the Product did not contain its characterizing ingredient [hazelnut]," the complaint asserts. The plaintiff argues that the front-label disclosure is a legal requirement and "a material term on which a reasonable consumer would rely." The complaint points to examples of competitors' hazelnut coffees that contain front-of-package disclosures as well as similar disclosures on other varieties of coffee sold by NECC. The complaint asserts that after the plaintiff sent a notification-and-demand letter to NECC in 2017, the company added the disclosure to 15 of the…
A Massachusetts federal court has dismissed half of the claims in a lawsuit alleging Diageo-Guinness misrepresents where its Guinness Stout beer is brewed. O’Hara v. Diageo-Guinness USA Inc., No. 15-14139 (D. Mass., entered March 27, 2018). The plaintiff alleged that the “Frequently Asked Questions” page of Guinness’ website stated that “All Guinness sold in the UK, Ireland, and North America is brewed in Ireland at the historic St. James’s Gate Brewery in Dublin," while a disclosure on Guinness bottles sold in the United States indicate that the product is “Imported by DIAGEO – Guinness USA, Stamford, CT. Brewed and bottled by Guinness Brewing Company, New Brunswick, Canada. Product of Canada.” The court dismissed three of the six causes of action because the bottling and packaging labels were approved by the U.S. Alcohol and Tobacco Tax and Trade Bureau. A misrepresentation claim and two claims for violations of state consumer-protection laws will…
Utz Quality Foods Inc. has agreed to pay $1.25 million to settle a putative class action alleging that some products were labeled “natural” despite containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs) and synthetic ingredients. DiFrancesco v. Utz Quality Foods, Inc., 14-14744 (D. Mass., settlement agreement filed December 6, 2017). The complaint alleged the snacks contained GMO grains and synthetic ingredients such as caramel color, malic acid and citric acid. Class members will receive $2 for each qualifying purchase up to a total of $20 and residual funds will be paid to nonprofit group Consumers Union. Utz has also agreed to stop using the terms “natural” and “all natural” on labeling and advertising of the products.
A Massachusetts federal court has dismissed a putative class action against Conagra Brands that alleged the company’s Wesson cooking oil was not “100% natural” because it is extracted from grains grown from genetically modified organisms (GMOs), ruling the plaintiff had failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. Lee v. Conagra Brands, Inc., No. 17-11042 (D. Mass., entered October 25, 2017). Taking judicial notice of U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance, the court noted that the agency has “not attempted to restrict the use of the term 'natural' except for added color, synthetic substances, and flavors." In addition, the court held that according to FDA guidance, Conagra is not required to disclose on its labels the use of GMO plants. The plaintiff alleged a single count for deceptive business practices, but the court ruled that because the label conformed to FDA guidelines, it was not “unfair…
The owner of one of the largest commercial fishing businesses in the United States has pleaded guilty to conspiracy, falsifying federal records, cash smuggling and tax evasion in a case accusing him of deliberately misreporting the types of fish he caught to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). U.S. v. Rafael, No. 16-10124 (D. Mass, plea entered March 30, 2017). Carlos Rafael, owner of Carlos Seafood, Inc. and known as the “Codfather,” will face possible forfeiture of his business assets and up to five years in prison at his June 2017 sentencing. An Internal Revenue Service (IRS) investigation apparently found that Rafael caught 800,000 pounds of fish over several years and reported it as haddock, pollock or other species with high NOAA quotas despite containing thousands of pounds of fish with lower quotas, including cod, flounder, grey sole, yellowtail and American plaice. Rafael also told IRS agents posing as…
A Massachusetts federal court has granted certification to a class of former and current delivery drivers for Domino’s Pizza Inc. who allege that they should have received the delivery charge paid by customers. Mooney v. Domino’s Pizza, Inc., No. 14-13723 (D. Mass., order entered September 1, 2016). The plaintiffs also asserted that they should have been paid minimum wage for “inside work” unrelated to deliveries, rather than the lower minimum wage for tipped workers. The court focused on whether the plaintiffs’ claims were common to all members of the class. Domino’s and its franchisee argued the classification of the delivery fee as a service charge—which is to compensate employees for service and to be remitted to the employees under Massachusetts law—or an administrative fee “depends on the circumstances of each customer’s encounter with the delivery fee,” thus precluding commonality. The court disagreed, finding that “the plain language of the statute suggests…
A Massachusetts federal court has dismissed a lawsuit alleging ACH Food Companies Inc. mislabeled its Weber® barbecue sauce as “All Natural” despite containing caramel coloring, finding that a $75 rebate rendered the case moot. Demmler v. ACH Food Cos. Inc., No. 15-13556 (D. Mass., order entered June 9, 2016). Details about the complaint appear in Issue 582 of this Update. The court found ACH had tendered full relief to the plaintiff by sending him treble statutory damages. Further, “the $75 check did not represent a settlement offer—ACH sent the check unprompted, and did not impose any preconditions on [the plaintiff] for doing so. This distinction makes all the difference,” the court held. The plaintiff could not pursue damages when he had already been made whole, the court noted, and his “refusal to accept the $75 is immaterial. The question under Article III is whether a live case or controversy exists,…
A Connecticut federal court has reportedly approved the dismissal of Pepperidge Farm's lawsuit against Trader Joe's Co. alleging the grocery infringed Pepperidge Farm's trademarked Milano® cookies. Pepperidge Farm v. Trader Joe's Co., No. 15-1774 (D. Conn., order entered March 9, 2016). The lawsuit challenged Trader Joe's Crispy Cookies, which Pepperidge Farm asserted were the same shape and sold in similar packaging to Milano® cookies. The order is the first legal filing in the case since the lawsuit was filed in December 2015; an attorney for Pepperidge Farm told Law360 that the parties had reached a "mutually satisfactory resolution." Additional information about the complaint appears in Issue 586 of this Update. See Law360, March 10, 2016. Issue 598
A Maine federal court has granted the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) a permanent injunction against Mill Stream Corp., a seafood company that allegedly failed to take measures preventing the formation and growth of Clostridium botulinum, the cause of botulism, or Listeria monocytogenes, the cause of listeriosis. U.S. v. Mill Stream Corp., No. 16-0080 (D. Me., order entered February 12, 2016). The injunction prevents the company and its employees from processing or distributing food produced at Mill Stream’s facilities or by its owner until several conditions have been satisfied, including: (i) retention of an independent laboratory to test for Listeria, (ii) development of Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point plans by an independent expert, (iii) implementation of such plans, (iv) completion of additional employee training, and (v) approval to reopen by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). “The failure to plan for and control the presence of bacteria and neurotoxins…
