A California court of appeal has ruled valid the methods by which the state updates the list of chemicals known to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity under the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act (Prop. 65). Cal. Chamber of Commerce v. Brown, No. A125493 (Cal. Ct. App., decided June 6, 2011). Products containing these chemicals must be labeled with warnings to consumers. The law requires the state to update the Prop. 65 list annually and authorizes Cal/EPA’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) to add chemicals by one of three methods, including one specifically targeted in the lawsuit. The Chamber of Commerce challenged the method that requires adding to the list those chemicals identified under the Labor Code as causing cancer or reproductive toxicity. According to the Chamber, this method could be used to place chemicals on the initial list only. It sought a declaration to this effect…
Category Archives U.S. Circuit Courts
Another tomato grower has filed a claim for damages against the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), alleging that the agency announced a nationwide recall of all tomatoes in the United States in 2008 without having identified tomatoes as the source of a Salmonella outbreak. Williams Farms Produce Sales, Inc. v. United States, No. 11-01399 (D.S.C., filed June 8, 2011). Details about similar claims also filed in a South Carolina federal court appear in Issue 395 of this Update. According to the complaint, FDA ultimately conceded that tomatoes were not the source of the Salmonella contamination, but not before the price for tomatoes plunged. Alleging negligence, defamation, slander of title, product/ commercial disparagement, unconstitutional taking, and violation of unfair trade practices law, the plaintiff seeks actual damages in excess of $11 million, special damages, compensatory damages, treble damages, attorney’s fees, and costs.
Alabama and Indiana residents have filed a putative class action alleging violation of state consumer protection laws by a company that promotes its orange juice as “not from concentrate juice” and “100% pure Florida squeezed,” when it allegedly “contains orange juice concentrate and water.” Leftwich v. TWS Mktg. Group, Inc., No. 11-01879 (D. Ala., filed June 2, 2011). Seeking to certify a nationwide class of consumers, the plaintiffs refer to a Food and Drug Administration letter warning the defendant that its labeling violated the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The plaintiffs contend that they were misled by the product labeling and that the alleged misrepresentations were a substantial factor in influencing their decisions to purchase the products. They allege a loss of money, because they were “deprived of the benefit of their bargain.” The plaintiffs allege violations of consumer protection laws, breach of express warranty and unjust enrichment. Claiming…
A New York bakery and its shareholder have filed a trademark infringement action against the Food Network, claiming that its proposed “Tough Cookies” show would confuse consumers. One Tough Cookie, Inc. v. Scripps Networks Interactive, Inc., No. 11-03675 (S.D.N.Y., filed May 31, 2011). According to the complaint, the Food Network has adopted “Tough Cookies” as the name of a “reality” TV series that will air in July 2011. It is apparently based on a “specialty bakery in New Jersey” called Crazy Susan’s Cookie Co. The plaintiffs allege that they are nationally known for “concentrating in ‘edible art’ in the form of cakes, cookies, and other pastries and baked goods” and registered their One Tough Cookie® mark in 2006. The plaintiffs also allege, “Each time the ‘Tough Cookies’ television show airs, plaintiffs’ website and web server will be compromised due to television fans attempting to find the ‘Tough Cookies’ television show…
A federal judge in California has refused to dismiss proposed class actions alleging that Ben & Jerry’s and Breyers ice cream products were falsely advertised as all natural. Astiana v. Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc., No. 10-4387 (N.D. Cal., decided May 26, 2011); Thurston v. Conopco, Inc., No. 10-4937 (N.D. Cal., decided May 26, 2011). Filed after the Center for Science in the Public Interest drew attention to the issue, the complaints argue that two units owned by Unilever PLC “misrepresented ice cream containing ‘Dutch’ or ‘alkalized cocoa’ as ‘all natural’” even though the ingredient is purportedly processed with synthetic potassium carbonate. The defendants had sought to dismiss both actions on the grounds that plaintiffs did not demonstrate an injury resulting from the “all natural” claim and could have easily applied for a refund if dissatisfied. Noting that plaintiffs may very well “have no actionable claims,” the court reasoned that, “If…
A federal judge in Florida has reportedly granted a motion for permanent injunction in a trademark infringement case involving two “never-ending” restaurant promotions. According to media sources, Darden Concepts Inc., which owns Olive Garden and Red Lobster, filed an October 2010 complaint alleging that a TGI Friday Inc. franchisee with outlets in seven states had infringed on its “never-ending pasta” and “all you can eat” shrimp slogans by advertising a “never-ending shrimp” deal. Under terms of the settlement, TGI Friday’s must halt its “never-ending” promotion, which evidently ran as 630 TV spots in anticipation of a national campaign. See Law360, June 6, 2011.
More than 200 farm workers from Ecuador, Panama and Costa Rica have reportedly filed seven lawsuits against commercial banana growers and pesticide manufacturers, seeking to recover damages and medical monitoring costs for health conditions allegedly related to dibromochloropropane (DBCP) exposure. Aguilar v. Dole Food Co., Inc., No. __ (E.D. La., filed June 1, 2011). The complaints argue that defendants used DBCP from approximately 1960 to 1985—“and possibly into the 1990s”—in banana growing regions outside the United States, which banned the nematocide in 1979 after the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) listed it as a suspected carcinogen. Plaintiffs claim that because they were not informed of the danger or provided with protective clothing, they injected DBCP into soil without the use of gloves, protective covering or respiratory equipment to prevent skin absorption or inhalation. “Many workers absorbed so much DBCP each day that their urine would give off the smell of the chemical…
A federal judge in California has granted class certification in a suit alleging that Diamond Foods, Inc. misbranded its shelled walnut products and misled consumers by using “express and implied statements about the positive effects of omega-3 fatty acid consumption on health.” Zeisel v. Diamond Foods, Inc., N0. 10-01192 (N.D. Cal., decided June 7, 2011). The labels at issue apparently featured a heart symbol banner with the phrase “Omega 3 2.5 g per serving” and a structural claim about the omega-3 in walnuts, as well as a qualified health claim approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). After FDA issued a February 2010 warning letter about these so-called combination claims, a consumer filed a complaint alleging that Diamond used language not authorized by FDA and that its products “did not provide the health benefits that were claimed on the package labels.” Plaintiff then moved to certify a class of all…
A man who claims that his consumption of Ocean Spray’s 100% Cranberry Pomegranate Juice® caused his food poisoning and other related injuries, has filed an individual action against the company, retailers and a testing laboratory in an Illinois state court. Mihalopoulos v. Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc., No. 2011L005420 (Ill. Cir. Ct., Cook Cty., filed May 25, 2011). The plaintiff alleges that the product was contaminated with a “fungus known as Penicillium Glabrum.” Part of the complaint alleges that a testing laboratory confirmed the presence of the fungus in the product, but failed to preserve the juice sample, which the plaintiff contends will prejudice his ability to prosecute the remainder of his claims. Alleging strict products liability, negligence and spoliation of evidence, the plaintiff seeks damages in excess of $50,000 for his “severe and permanent injury,” medical costs and future economic losses.
According to a news source, a Florida resident has filed a putative class action against Kraft Foods Global, Inc., alleging that the packaging for its Oscar Mayer® deli meat products misleads consumers by declaring the meat to be 98 percent fat free, with 50 calories per serving. McDougal v. Kraft Foods, Inc., No. 11-61202 (S.D. Fla., filed May 23, 2011). The plaintiff contends that consumers are misled to believe that just 2 percent of the 50 calories come from fat, when 20 percent of the calories per serving actually come from fat. Seeking to certify statewide and nationwide classes, the plaintiff alleges violation of consumer protection laws, breach of express warranty and unjust enrichment. The complaint is similar to one filed in a different federal district in Florida in April. Additional details about that lawsuit appear in Issue 391 of this Update. See Law360, May 24, 2011.
