The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation has denied a plaintiff’s motion to centralize several lawsuits involving recalled infant formula, purportedly contaminated with insects, before a multidistrict litigation (MDL) court for pretrial proceedings. In re: Abbott Labs., Inc., Similac Prods. Liab. Litig., MDL No. 2211 (J.P.M.L., decided February 4, 2011). The panel noted that while it had centralized food-product contamination lawsuits in the past, it would not be appropriate to do so here because individual issues predominated over common ones. According to the panel, “discovery and motion practice may be expected to concern (1) the particular product each plaintiff purchased, (2) any injuries that consumption of the product caused, (3) whether the product contained beetles or beetle larvae, and/or (4) what advertising or other representations were made to each particular plaintiff (and, relatedly, whether the plaintiff relied upon those representations).” Still, the panel encouraged the parties to pursue a voluntary coordination strategy,…
Category Archives Litigation
Montana and California residents have sued Safeway, Inc. in a California state court on behalf of a putative nationwide class of customers that the company allegedly failed to notify about tainted food recalls despite the ability to contact purchasers of contaminated products through its “club card” loyal customer program. Hensley-Maclean v. Safeway, Inc., No. __ (Cal. Super. Ct., Alameda Cty., filed February 2, 2011). Backed by the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), the plaintiffs allege that they purchased Salmonella-tainted peanut butter and egg products from the grocery and learned only by chance on the news or from neighbors that the products were subject to a recall. According to the complaint, the company’s club card program gives the grocery contact information for participating customers and a history of the purchases they have made. The plaintiffs allege, “Many of Safeway’s competitors already use their own customer data to notify their…
A California resident who purportedly bought the hazelnut spread Nutella® to provide a nutritious snack or breakfast for her 4-year-old daughter has filed a putative class action against its manufacturer alleging violations of consumer protection laws. Hohenberg v. Ferrero U.S.A., Inc., No. 11-0205 (S.D. Cal., filed February 1, 2011). Seeking to represent a nationwide class of consumers who purchased the product since 2000, Athena Hohenberg claims that she relied on the company’s product advertisements and representations that Nutella® is a “healthy breakfast” and “nutritious.” According to the complaint, she did not learn until December 2010 “through friends what ingredients were in the Nutella® that she was feeding her family. She was shocked to learn that Nutella® was in fact not a ‘healthy’ ‘nutritious’ food but instead was the next best thing to a candy bar,” containing “about 70% saturated fat and processed sugar by weight.” Characterizing herself as a “reasonably…
A federal court in Missouri has denied in part and granted in part the summary judgment motions filed by Texas and Louisiana rice farmers as well as the company they sued in the first group of cases in this multidistrict litigation (MDL) to be remanded to their transferor courts for trial. In re: Genetically Modified Rice Litig., MDL No. 1811 (E.D. Mo., decided February 1, 2011). The litigation involves claims that conventional U.S. rice farmers sustained market losses when other countries learned that the U.S. rice supply had been contaminated with a genetically modified (GM) rice variety and then prohibited all U.S. imports. To date, the company has lost a number of bellwether trials and has entered settlements with some purportedly affected farmers. Relying on previous dispositive rulings, the court dismissed the Louisiana plaintiffs’ claims under the North Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act and their claims for punitive damages. The court allowed…
According to a news source, Costa Rican farmers who allege they were injured by exposure to a pesticide used on Dole Food Co.’s banana plantations have been unable to obtain visas to enter the United States for medical testing. A state court ordered that the plaintiffs be tested in U.S. laboratories, apparently to avoid evidence tampering. Embassy officials have reportedly denied the visas finding that the applicants lack “sufficient ties to Costa Rica.” Plaintiffs’ counsel Mark Sparks contends that his clients are “extremely poor” and lack the indicia of residency, such as bank accounts, business records and car titles, that embassy officials have requested. Plaintiffs’ and defendants’ counsel have reportedly drafted a letter for the presiding judge to send to U.S. embassy officials to allow the Costa Rican plaintiffs to travel to Los Angeles for the limited purpose of medical testing and responding to interrogatories. At least one legal commentator…
A Utah woman who claims that E. coli-tainted spinach caused her irritable bowel syndrome and subsequent chronic incapacitation has reportedly settled her lawsuit against three California-based companies. Chelsey Macey, 26, and her husband were seeking damages in excess of $5 million. A jury awarded the couple that amount in compensatory damages, but before it could consider an award for pain and suffering, the parties apparently settled. The defendants were Dole Food Co., Natural Selection Foods and Mission Organics. See KSBW.com, January 20, 2011.
A California resident has filed a putative class action against Taco Bell Corp., alleging that the company violates consumer protection laws by mislabeling some of its beef products as containing seasoned beef “when in fact a substantial amount of the filling contains substances other than beef.” Obney v. Taco Bell Corp., No. 11-00101 (C.D. Cal., filed January 19, 2011). Seeking to certify a nationwide class of consumers and claiming that damages exceed $5 million, the plaintiff alleges violations of California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act and unlawful business acts and practices, including misbranded food in violation of federal law. She also asks for declaratory and injunctive relief, a corrective advertising campaign, attorney’s fees, and costs. According to plaintiff’s counsel, testing has shown that “the taco meat filling is about 35 percent meat.” The complaint asserts that the company’s use of the term “seasoned beef” in the labeling and advertising of its beef…
A federal district court in New York has granted the motion for summary judgment filed by Snapple Beverage Corp. in a case alleging that the company misled consumers by labeling its teas and juice drinks as “All Natural” because the company’s beverages contain high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS). Weiner v. Snapple Beverage Corp., No. 07-8742 (S.D.N.Y., decided January 21, 2011). The court had previously denied plaintiffs’ motion for class certification but determined, despite that denial, that it could decide the merits of the summary judgment motion even though the lawsuit now failed to satisfy the requirements of original diversity jurisdiction. The defendant argued that the plaintiffs did not offer any evidence showing injury from Snapple’s “All Natural” labeling, and the court agreed. Analyzing each claim—violation of a state deceptive practices law, unjust enrichment, and breach of express and implied warranty—the court found that the plaintiffs failed to present reliable evidence that they…
According to a news source, a co-defendant in litigation alleging a price-fixing conspiracy in the northeastern U.S. milk market has filed objections to the tentative deal reached by Dean Foods Co. and the dairy farmers who filed the lawsuit. Allen v. Dairy Farmers of Am., No. __ (D. Vt., settlement reached December 24, 2010). More information about the settlement, which must be approved by a court, appears in Issue 376 of this Update. Dairy Marketing Services, LLC and a number of individual dairy farmers have also apparently opposed the settlement. The objectors contend that the settlement will result in price erosion for all dairy farmers and creates “both winners and losers in the class of dairy farmers represented by a single law firm by taking market access from one group of dairy farmers at the expense of another within the same class.” They also claim that the small settlement of…
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL) have reportedly filed amicus briefs with the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, supporting the efforts of counsel for Sholom Rubashkin to overturn his conviction and sentence for financial fraud at his Iowa meat processing facility. The kosher plant was raided in 2008, 389 undocumented workers were arrested, and Rubashkin was initially charged with violating immigration laws. These charges were ultimately dropped, and a jury acquitted him of hiring underage workers. Prosecutors then aggressively pursued charges that he falsified bank records to inflate sales and diverted customer payments for personal use, and he was found guilty on 86 counts in November 2009. The court sentenced Rubashkin to 27 years in prison, a term longer than recommended by prosecutors. While the ACLU and NACDL reportedly focus their briefs on accusations that the sentencing court improperly cooperated with prosecutors…
