A federal court has blocked the state of Arkansas from enforcing a 2019 law that made it illegal for companies to use words like “burger” or “sausage” to describe products not made from animals. Turtle Island Foods SPC v. Soman, No. 19-0514 (E.D. Ark., entered September 30, 2022). The ruling was in a lawsuit brought by the Good Food Institute, Animal Legal Defense Fund and the American Civil Liberties Union on behalf of Tofurky, a maker of plant-based meat products. The suit challenged an Arkansas law that would have made it illegal for companies to use words typically associated with animal products to describe products not made from animals. The plaintiffs alleged that the law violates Tofurky’s First Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment rights. The court granted the plaintiffs a permanent injunction against the state, finding that the state appears to believe that the simple use of words like “burger,” “ham”…
Category Archives 8th Circuit
Three consumers have filed a putative class action against alternative-meat manufacturer Beyond Meat, Inc., alleging the company misled consumers as to the amount of protein in its products. Garcia v. Beyond Meat, Inc., No. 22-297 (S.D. Iowa, filed on September 9, 2022). The plaintiffs—who live in Colorado, Iowa and Florida—allege they relied on representations regarding the percent daily value of protein in the products, as well as labeling stating the amount of protein contained in the products. They assert that Beyond Meat products’ stated protein amount and percent daily value claims are false and misleading, and that they chose to pay a premium price for the product based on the company’s representations. “Simply put, Defendant’s protein amount and/or protein DV% for the Products are a farce,” the plaintiffs assert in the complaint. “Defendant knowingly prepared the material on their website and product labels to misrepresent the true protein amount and/or…
A Minnesota federal court has ruled that the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) violated the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) when it adopted the New Swine Inspection System (NSIS), which eliminated line speed limits for pork processing. United Food & Com. Workers Union, Local 663 v. USDA, No. 19-2660 (D. Minn., entered March 31, 2021). The court found that the final rule establishing the NSIS "contains no discussion, analysis, or evaluation of the worker safety comments" that it received during the notice-and-comment period. "The only response FSIS gave to the worker safety comments it solicited was to state that it lacked authority to regulate worker safety. In context, the agency appeared to suggest that it wanted to consider the comments but was not legally permitted to do so," the court held. "By offering its lack of legal authority and expertise on worker safety as its only…
A consumer has filed a putative class action alleging that Panera Bread Co., or St. Louis Bread Co., markets its products as "100% clean" but sells products with ingredients "that are artificial, chemical, and/or synthetic preservatives, sweeteners, flavors, and colors." Sally v. Panera Bread Co., No. 20-1068 (St. Louis Cir. Ct., filed August 13, 2020). The complaint asserts that multiple products contain preservatives, including ascorbic acid, citric acid, potassium sorbate and tocopherols. "[A] preservative as defined by the FDA is a substance that 'tends' to prevent or retard the deterioration of foods," the complaint states. "Thus, it is not necessary that it function as a preservative in every single instance for it to qualify as a preservative according to the FDA's definition, so long as this is its general tendency." The plaintiff seeks class certification, refunds, injunctive relief, punitive damages, attorney's fees and costs for an alleged violation of the Missouri…
An Arkansas federal court has granted Turtle Island Foods SPC, which does business as Tofurky Co., a preliminary injunction preventing the enforcement against it of an Arkansas law prohibiting the use of meat-related terms to describe plant-based products on food packaging. Turtle Island Foods SPC v. Soman, No. 19-0514 (E.D. Ark., C. Div., entered December 11, 2019). The court found that Tofurky "likely faces ruinous civil liability, enormous operational costs, or a cessation of in-state operations" if the statute is enforced against it. The court granted the preliminary injunction despite Arkansas' indication that it "does not intend to begin enforcement" until the constitutional challenge is resolved because "there is nothing in the record binding the State to that position" and "the State has made no assurances that it will not levy retroactive penalties for Tofurky's alleged violations of Act 501 between the law's passage and this litigation's conclusion."
A Missouri federal court has reportedly declined to issue a preliminary injunction blocking the state from enforcing its law defining meat as derived from animals. The law requires plant-based or laboratory-grown food to feature a label indicating its source. Turtle Island Foods, the American Civil Liberties Union and the Good Food Institute have reportedly appealed the judge’s denial.
Turtle Island Foods, which does business as The Tofurky Co., has filed a civil-rights action alleging an Arkansas law that "prohibits purveyors of plant- or cell-based meats from using the words 'meat' and related terms like 'beef,' 'pork,' 'roast,' and 'sausage'" is "a restriction on commercial speech that prevents companies from sharing truthful and non-misleading information about their products." Turtle Island Foods SPC v. Soman, No. 19-0514 (E.D. Ark., W. Div., filed July 22, 2019). Turtle Island argues that the law creates consumer confusion rather than helping resolve it, asserting that its own marketing and its competitors' marketing "emphasizes—through the use of commonly understood terms like 'veggie burger'—that their products are plant-based alternatives to meat from live animals." The complaint further argues that other laws already prohibit misleading or deceptive labeling, including the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act and the Federal Trade Commission Act. Turtle Island alleges violations of…
The Good Food Institute (GFI) and Tofurky Co. have filed a civil-rights action alleging that Missouri "criminalizes truthful speech by prohibiting 'misrepresenting' a product as 'meat' if that product is 'not derived from harvested production livestock or poultry.'" Turtle Island Foods v. Richardson, No. 18-4173 (W.D. Mo., filed August 27, 2018). The lawsuit responds to Missouri's agriculture bill, which was amended to include the contested language in June 2018 and took effect August 28. The complaint alleges that the statute seeks "to prevent plant-based and clean meat producers, including Tofurky, from accurately informing consumers what their products are: foods designed to fulfill the roles conventional meat has traditionally played in a meal." The plaintiffs argue that consumers are unlikely to be confused because "historically, the term 'meat' has had multiple meanings, including to describe the edible part of any food, such as a fruit or nut"; further, "clean meat" products…
A Missouri federal court has dismissed with prejudice a putative class action alleging Dr Pepper Snapple Group Inc. mislabels Canada Dry Ginger Ale because it does not contain ginger. Webb v. Dr Pepper Snapple Grp. Inc., No. 17-0624 (W.D. Mo., entered June 21, 2018). The court approved a stipulated voluntary dismissal filed by the named plaintiff. In April 2018, the court denied the beverage maker’s motion to dismiss, finding the plaintiff had adequately pleaded all of the seven counts alleged.
A Missouri federal court has denied Dr Pepper Snapple Group Inc.’s motion to dismiss a putative class action alleging Canada Dry Ginger Ale is falsely labeled because it does not contain ginger. Webb v. Dr Pepper Snapple Grp. Inc., No. 17-0624 (W.D. Mo., entered April 25, 2018). The plaintiff alleged that although the labeling, packaging and marketing of the product includes the statement “Made from Real Ginger,” independent laboratory testing found no detectable ginger in the beverage. The lawsuit echoes similar putative class actions filed in California. The Missouri court rejected all of Dr Pepper Snapple Group’s arguments, finding the plaintiff had adequately pleaded each of the seven counts alleged, including violation of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act, fraud and intentional misrepresentation.
