A consumer has filed a putative class action against Kraft Foods Group, Inc. alleging that the company’s Knudsen Hampshire Sour Cream is labeled as containing 60 calories with 3.5 grams of saturated fat per halfcup while the actual content is 240 calories with 14 grams of saturated fat. Appel v. Kraft Foods Grp., Inc., No. BC587662 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed July 9, 2015). The plaintiff further alleges that the listed sodium content of 10 milligrams and sugar content of one gram is incorrect because the sour cream actually contains 40 milligrams of sodium and four grams of sugar. The complaint does not provide the source of the plaintiff’s quadrupled figures. He alleges that Kraft has violated California consumer-protection statutes and seeks class certification, compensatory and punitive damages, restitution, an injunction, and attorney’s fees. Issue 572
Category Archives State Courts
Six consumers have filed a lawsuit against Foster Poultry Farms alleging that the company knowingly sold chicken tainted with Salmonella that sickened the plaintiffs with salmonellosis syndrome. Melendez v. Foster Poultry Farms, No. BC586891 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed July 2, 2015). The complaint asserts that Foster Farms refused to issue a recall after it knew of a link between its products and incidents of Salmonella infections. Foster Farms “begrudgingly initiated a very limited recall of its tainted chicken on July 12, 2014,” the plaintiffs argue, only after the investigators tested a Foster Farms product from a sickened consumer’s home and it tested positive for the outbreak strain of Salmonella. The complaint further alleges that Foster Farms promoted the growth of the bacteria by failing to meet operational and food safety standards in the months before the outbreak. The plaintiffs allege strict product liability, negligence and breach of…
A consumer has filed a putative class action against Unilever U.S., PepsiCo and the Pepsi Lipton Tea Partnership alleging that their line of Pure Leaf® Iced Teas are misleadingly labeled as “All Natural” and preservative-free because they contain citric acid, a synthetic ingredient. Ren v. Unilever U.S., Inc., No. 156463/2015 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., filed June 26, 2015). The complaint asserts that Pure Leaf® labels indicate that the products are natural and contain no preservatives despite containing citric acid, which is “industrially manufactured by fermenting certain genetically mutant strains of the black mold fungus, Aspergillus niger.” The companies use citric acid as a preservative, the complaint argues, and it disputes the accuracy of a note in the ingredient list explaining that citric acid provides tartness. The plaintiff seeks class certification, declaratory judgments, damages, restitution, an injunction, and attorney’s fees for allegations of unjust enrichment, breach of warranties, negligent misrepresentation and violations…
Consumer Advocacy Group, Inc. has filed a lawsuit against T.J. Maxx, its parent company and its food supplier alleging that they failed to provide a warning of lead content in a raspberry balsamic vinegar product in accordance with the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Prop. 65), the California law that requires warnings on the labels of products that contain substances known to cause cancer or reproductive harm. Consumer Advocacy Grp. Inc. v. Olivier Napa Valley Inc., No. BC580857 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed May 4, 2015). The complaint asserts that because all “[v]inegar contains lead,” the defendants should have known that the product was subject to Prop. 65 labeling requirements. Consumer Advocacy Group argues that it investigated the product and gave notice of the alleged violation to each defendant, the state attorney general, county district attorneys and city attorneys but none of the authorities…
Two consumers have filed a putative class action against Anheuser-Busch in California state court alleging that the company misuses the “Product of U.S.A.” claim on Busch® beer cans because the product is brewed with imported hops. Nixon v. Anheuser-Busch Cos., LLC, No. 15-544985 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco Cty., filed March 27, 2015). The complaint asserts that Anheuser-Busch charged premium prices for beer made in the United States despite using imported hops, or “a significant portion” of the beer. The plaintiffs allege unfair competition and a violation of California’s “Made in USA” law. They seek to represent a statewide class of purchasers and to receive damages and an injunction. Issue 561
The estate and survivors of an 89-year-old woman who died after eating imported pomegranate seeds linked to a Hepatitis A outbreak have filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Townsend Farms Inc., Costco Wholesale Corp. and others alleging strict liability for a product defect, negligence and breach of implied warranties. Schelitzche v. Townsend Farms Inc., No. BC576437 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed March 23, 2015). The complaint details the 2013 outbreak of Hepatitis A virus, which the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and state and local health agencies apparently traced to 3-pound bags of Townsend Farms Organic Antioxidant Blend frozen berries sold at Costco. The plaintiffs seek wrongful-death and survival damages and other general, punitive and exemplary damages. While the plaintiffs’ suit is the first to claim wrongful-death damages, details of other lawsuits stemming from the same Hepatitis A outbreak appear in Issues…
The parents of an 11-year-old boy who died in 2013 have filed a wrongful death lawsuit against Quorn Foods, Inc. and several distributors alleging that the mycoprotein in a Quorn® Turk’y Burger caused their son to go into anaphylactic shock, which resulted in his death. Bengco v. Quorn Foods, Inc., No. BC576522 (Cal. Super. Ct., C.D. Los Angeles Cty., filed March 24, 2015). The complaint calls Quorn’s product “highly processed mold,” to which the boy had a severe allergy. According to the complaint, the product label of Quorn’s Turk’y Burger lists “Mycoprotein (47%)” as the first ingredient, and the description explains that “’myco’ is Greek for ‘fungi.’” The description also explains that “[t]here are believed to be over 600,000 varieties of fungi in the world, many of which are among the most sought after foods like varieties of mushrooms, truffles, and morels” but the product is not, the complaint notes, a…
A Florida consumer has filed a proposed class action against Hampton Creek, maker of vegan spread “Just Mayo,” in Florida state court alleging that the product is falsely labeled and advertised because it does not contain eggs. Davis v. Hampton Creek Inc., No. 2015-5993-CA (Fla. 11th Jud. Cir. Ct., filed March 13, 2015). The complaint cites definitions of “just” and “mayo” to argue that the product name fools reasonable consumers into believing that it is mayonnaise despite containing no eggs. The plaintiff further points to the label, which includes an egg-shaped outline, and to the website, which previously advertised the product as “an outrageously delicious mayonnaise that’s better for your body, for your wallet, and for the planet.” She alleges a violation of Florida’s consumer-protection statute and unjust enrichment and seeks class certification, damages, restitution, an injunction, and attorney’s fees. Unilever, producer of Hellmann’s mayonnaise, challenged Hampton Creek’s “Just Mayo”…
Citing independent product tests, four consumers seeking to represent a class have filed a lawsuit in California state court alleging that dozens of wineries in the state manufacture and sell wine that contains as much as five times the maximum safe daily limit of arsenic. Charles v. The Wine Grp., Inc., No. BC576061 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed March 19, 2015). “[J]ust a glass or two of these arsenic contaminated wines a day over time could result in dangerous arsenic toxicity to the consumer,” the complaint alleges. The plaintiffs apparently hired BeverageGrades, an independent laboratory in Colorado, to test for levels of inorganic arsenic, which is “substantially more toxic and dangerous to humans” than organic arsenic, the complaint says. Ingestion is reportedly linked to a variety of health issues, including nausea, vomiting, disturbances of the cardiovascular and nervous systems, and type 2 diabetes. The complaint asserts that in…
A California appeals court has affirmed a lower court’s ruling against plaintiff Environmental Law Foundation (ELF), which alleged that the products of Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp. and other food manufacturers, distributors and retailers contained sufficient amounts of lead to trigger warnings required under the state’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Prop. 65). Envtl. Law Found. v. Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp., No. A139821 (Cal. Ct. App., 1st App. D., Div. 1, order entered March 17, 2015). ELF argued that several products, including foods predominantly intended for babies and toddlers, contained more than the state’s safe-harbor level of 0.5 micrograms per day. On appeal, ELF challenged the trial court’s decision to allow Beech-Nut’s experts to average lead test results over multiple lots rather than evaluating each individually because the single highest result may have met the minimum threshold for Prop. 65 labeling. The court dismissed the challenge, finding that averaging…
