The Second Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed a lower court ruling that rejected the restaurant industry’s preemption and First Amendment challenge to New York City’s health code provision mandating that certain restaurant chains post calorie information on their menu boards. New York State Rest. Ass’n v. NYC Bd. of Health, No. 08-1892 (2d Cir., decided February 17, 2009). The rule has been in effect since July 2008 and applies to restaurants that are part of chains with at least 15 outlets nationwide. The New York State Restaurant Association contended that the rule was preempted by the Nutrition Labeling and Education Act and infringed its members constitutional rights by compelling speech. According to the court, “In requiring chain restaurants to post calorie information on their menus, New York City merely stepped into a sphere that Congress intentionally left open to state and local governments. Furthermore, although the restaurants are protected…
Category Archives U.S. Circuit Courts
A federal court in California has denied a motion to dismiss putative class claims that Arizona Beverage Co. deceptively labels its products as “100% Natural,” “All Natural,” or “Natural,” despite using high-fructose corn syrup as an ingredient. Hitt v. Arizona Beverage Co., LLC, No. 08-809 (S.D. Cal., order entered February 4, 2009). The complaint also alleges that those beverages with fruit in the name are deceptively labeled because they “do not contain any substantial amount of the fruit named on the label.” The defendants sought to dismiss claims that they violated consumer fraud statutes by contending that they are expressly and impliedly preempted under federal law. The court summarily ruled that the plaintiff’s claims were not expressly preempted because they do not fall within any of the express preemption provisions of the Nutritional Labeling and Education Act. The court also ruled that the claims were not impliedly preempted because (i) the…
Video footage of former Aviagen Turkeys, Inc. employees allegedly abusing birds has reportedly led to criminal indictments for animal abuse. The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) apparently caught three turkey farm employees in the act, and 19 counts, including 11 felony charges, for cruelty to birds have been brought against them. Alabama-based Aviagen Turkeys reportedly fired all three workers for violating company policy. They could face significant jail time and fines if convicted. See meatingplace.com, February 9, 2009.
A federal inspector who alleged that he was injured after coming into contact with an air compression machine used to harvest pig brains in a pork processing plant has apparently agreed to dismiss his claims. Kinney v. Hormel Foods & Quality Pork Processors, No. __ (Third Jud. Dist., Minn., claimed filed January 2009). Dale Kinney, a U.S. Department of Agriculture inspector, reportedly sought $50,000 in damages for injury allegedly caused by his proximity to a machine that has purportedly been linked to neurological illness in some employees. According to a news source, a state court judge entered an order dismissing the suit with prejudice. A Hormel spokesperson reportedly said, “We were pleased to receive notification that the plaintiff offered to drop the suit and that the case was dismissed.” See Meatingplace.com, February 9, 2009.
Nebraska Beef, Ltd. has filed a lawsuit in federal court seeking a declaration that it was not responsible for the E. coli contamination that led to the recall of nearly 7 million pounds of beef in 2008. Nebraska Beef, Ltd. v. Meyer Foods Holdings, L.L.C., No. 09-43 (D. Neb., filed January 30, 2009). According to the complaint, the defendant provided the meat subject to the recall to Nebraska Beef for processing and shipping. When contaminants were found, the defendant informed Nebraska Beef that legal claims were being made against it and demanded indemnification from Nebraska Beef. Stating that it “expressly denies the Contamination originated at its processing plant; that it was negligent in its processing or handling of any cattle or product; or that it breached any of the terms of its agreement(s) with Meyer Natural Foods,” Nebraska Beef, which has also been sued over the incident, requests a judicial declaration as…
A federal court has refused to dismiss putative class claims filed under California’s consumer protection law against a company that advertises its pasta sauce, which contains high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS), as “all natural.” Lockwood v. ConAgra Foods, Inc., No. 08-04151 (N.D. Cal., decided February 3, 2009). The defendant sought to dismiss the claims on preemption grounds and called for the class allegations to be stricken “because plaintiffs cannot prove reliance on a class-wide basis.” According to the court, the federal Nutrition Labeling and Education Act (NLEA) does not apply to the “complaint as currently pled. Plaintiffs do not allege that defendant’s pasta sauce contains artificial flavoring, coloring or a chemical preservative; rather, they allege that the ‘high fructose corn syrup’ is not produced by a natural process and therefore the pasta sauce is not ‘all natural.’” The court also found that the claims were not impliedly preempted because “Congress has explicitly stated…
Food litigator William Marler has reportedly filed an amended complaint on behalf of a Vermont couple whose son was allegedly sickened and hospitalized following ingestion of a product containing Salmonella-tainted peanut butter. Meunier v. Peanut Corp. of Am., No. 09-12 (M.D. Ga., first amended complaint filed January 28, 2009). The plaintiffs are now seeking punitive damages for “willful concealment of known defects.” The amendment follows the release of a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspection report showing that the Peanut Corp. of America (PCA) shipped products that tested positive for Salmonella after the company had the products retested and received negative test results. Marler was quoted as saying, “In 15 years of litigating food cases, this is one of the worst examples of corporate irresponsibility I have ever seen. Not only does the plant appear to have atrocious practices, but the product that seems to have repeatedly tested positive for Salmonella was shipped…
A Massachusetts woman has filed a putative class action in federal court against Gerber Products Co., alleging that its packaging misrepresented the quality of its Fruit Juice Snacks®, which “were virtually nothing more than candy with a touch of vitamin C.” Wiley v. Gerber Prods. Co., No. 09-10099 (D. Mass, filed January 22, 2009). She seeks to represent a class of all consumers who purchased the product before Gerber changed its packaging to indicate that the product was a “treat” rather than a “snack.” Alleging violations of a Massachusetts consumer protection law, intentional and negligent misrepresentation, breach of express and implied warranties, and unjust enrichment, the plaintiff requests class certification, a declaration that Gerber’s acts and practices are unlawful, a permanent injunction, corrective advertising, and damages of $25 per violation amounting to more than $5 million, refunds, double or treble damages, attorney’s fees, and costs. According to the complaint, package…
POM Wonderful LLC has reportedly brought false advertising and unfair competition claims in federal court against Welch Foods Inc. for marketing a product with little pomegranate juice as a “white grape and pomegranate” juice. POM Wonderful LLC v. Welch Foods Inc., No. 09-00567 (C.D. Cal., filed January 23, 2009). According to a news source, POM Wonderful has built a multimillion-dollar business by making and marketing the health benefits of a pomegranate juice-based product line. The company alleges that Welch has taken advantage of its success by developing an intentionally confusing and misleading product and implying “that its product is of the same composition and quality of blended pomegranate juices such as plaintiff’s blended pomegranate juices, when in fact Welch’s has substituted much of the valuable and beneficial substance of pomegranate juice with economically and nutritionally inferior juices such as apple.” POM Wonderful apparently alleges that Welch has violated the false advertising…
Food litigator William Marler has filed a second lawsuit against the Peanut Corp. of America (PCA) on behalf of a California family whose 3-year-old son allegedly fell ill and was hospitalized after eating Salmonella-contaminated peanut butter cracker sandwiches made with a PCA peanut butter product. Trone v. Peanut Corp. of Am., No. 09-418 (N.D. Cal., filed January 28, 2009). The outbreak, which has reportedly sickened more than 500 people across the United States and contributed to eight deaths, has led to one of the largest food recalls in the nation’s history. PCA expanded its recall from peanut butter and peanut paste to all peanuts and peanut products, including whole peanuts (dried, roasted or raw), granulated peanuts and peanut meal, processed in its Blakely, Georgia, facility since January 1, 2007. According to the PCA recall notice, the company sold its recalled products to institutions, food service industries and private label food companies in…
