A federal court in California has issued an order preliminarily certifying a nationwide class for settlement purposes and approved the class settlement in a case alleging that Barbara’s Bakery misled consumers by labeling its products as “all natural” with “no artificial additives,” “no artificial preservatives,” or “no artificial flavors,” when they contained genetically modified (GM), artificial or synthetic ingredients. Trammell v. Barbara’s Bakery, Inc., No. 12-2664 (N.D. Cal., order filed June 26, 2013). Under the proposed terms, the company would create a $4 million non-revertible fund to pay class member claims, an incentive award for the named plaintiff, attorney’s fees, and costs of notice and administration. Class members would able to recover up to $100 for the purchase of products including cereals, cereal bars, cheese puffs, fig bars, granola bars, Snackanimal® animal cookies, organic mini-cookies, snack mixes, and crackers. The settlement would also require the company to modify the labeling and…
Tag Archives California
A California resident who worked at a TGI Fridays in Los Angeles has filed a putative class action on behalf of a statewide class of current and former nonexempt employees, alleging that the restaurant failed to pay them (i) when they showed up for their shifts but were told to go home due to light customer traffic, (ii) for the time they spent in mandatory meetings, and (iii) all the wages and other compensation due upon their discharge, termination or separation “either timely or fully.” Portillo v. TGI Fridays, Inc., No. BC12119 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed June 14, 2013). Alleging causes of action for failure to pay reporting time, waiting time damages, and unfair, unlawful or deceptive business practices, the plaintiff seeks compensatory and liquidated damages, interest, injunctive relief, attorney’s fees, and costs.
Women who worked at celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay’s Los Angeles restaurant, The Fat Cow, have filed a putative class action on behalf of all nonexempt employees against the restaurant and his company, alleging they were denied meal and rest breaks, were not compensated for the missed breaks, were not compensated for overtime, were not paid minimum wage, were not provided with timely and accurate wage-and-hour statements, did not promptly receive accrued wages when they left the job, and did not receive all of the gratuities contributed to a tip pool, which they claim the defendants improperly converted. Becerra v. The Fat Cow LLC, No. BC511953 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed June 13, 2013). The named plaintiffs include two former hostesses, a server and a barista. They seek economic damages, injunctive relief, restitution, the imposition of civil penalties, punitive damages, interest, attorney’s fees, and costs.
Three putative class action lawsuits have been filed against Kellogg Co. in a California federal court alleging that the company misleads consumers by labeling its Super Mario Fruit Snacks® and Pop Tarts® as “Made with Real Fruit.” Spevak v. Kellogg Co., No. 13-2767, Barnes v. Kellogg Co., No. 13-2768, Ford v. Kellogg Co., No. 13-2770 (N.D. Cal., filed June 14, 2013). Each plaintiff is represented by Benjamin Lopatin in the Law Offices of Howard Rubinstein. Plaintiff Alicia Spevak alleges that the “real fruit” claim is misleading because the fruit snack product “merely contains de minimis real fruit and unhealthy, unnatural ingredients, chemicals and preservative additives, in addition to merely containing apple puree rather than real fruit, which a reasonable consumer would not expect from a product claiming to be ‘Made with Real Fruit.’” Spevak seeks to represent a class of California product purchasers and alleges unfair, fraudulent and unlawful business practices; false and…
A federal court in California has denied the defendant’s motion to dismiss a putative class action alleging that the company misleads consumers by claiming that its Smart Balance® butter products contain plant sterols that can block the absorption of cholesterol; according to the plaintiff, a single serving of the product contains insufficient sterols to achieve the stated benefit. Aguilar v. Boulder Brands, Inc., No. 12-1862 (S.D. Cal., order entered June 10, 2013). Among other matters, the court determined that the named plaintiff had standing to assert claims involving two products that she did not purchase, because the products “advertise the same health benefits arising from the same additional ingredients found on the label in the same position” as the product she did purchase. According to the court, her ability to represent class members allegedly injured by similar products must be analyzed under Rule 23 and not on a motion to…
An outbreak of hepatitis A linked to frozen berry and pomegranate mixes sold in eight states has reportedly sickened 87 consumers to date and spawned at least three putative class actions seeking compensation for hepatitis A testing and vaccination. According to media reports, residents in Arizona, California and Nevada filed lawsuits after the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment advised all consumers exposed to the allegedly contaminated berries to request hepatitis A vaccination or immune globulin injections to reduce their risk of contracting the disease. In addition to the costs of vaccination, the complaints against Townsend Farms Corp. are seeking compensation for time missed from work as well as other expenses related to the outbreak. See Law360, June 3, 2013; NBC News, June 11, 2013; KTAR, June 12, 2013; KRNV & MyNews4.com, June 13, 2013.
A California resident has filed a putative statewide class action alleging that Pepperidge Farm falsely advertised and labeled its Goldfish® crackers as “Natural” despite using genetically modified (GM), synthetic or artificial ingredients to make them. Koehler v. Pepperidge Farm, Inc., No. 13-2644 (N.D. Cal., filed June 10, 2013). Among other matters, the plaintiff alleges that the company changed the product’s packaging and labeling to remove the “Natural” statement and characterizes this as “an implied admission that the Products were not natural at all material times hereto when the Plaintiff and putative Class Members purchased the Products that claimed to be ‘Natural’ and no longer make said claim.” According to the complaint, the company’s cheddar-flavored products “contain genetically modified soy in the form of soybean oil, as well as the following ingredients, which, upon information and belief, were each synthetically produced: thiamine mononitrate (‘vitamin B1’), riboflavin (‘vitamin B2’), folic acid and…
According to a news source, a California appeals court indicated during oral argument that it would likely reverse the dismissal order of a lower court in a wrongful death action alleging that Dole Food Co. paid Colombian paramilitaries to kill 170 people near South American banana plantations. Gomez v. Dole Food Co., Inc., No. B242400 (Cal. Ct. App., 2d App. Div.). During the June 12, 2013, hearing, the court reportedly said “legal problems” with the trial court’s dismissal were sufficient to warrant reversal. In 2012, the lower court dismissed the suit after the plaintiffs’ lawyers failed to file a new complaint within 30 days after an appeals court ruling allowing them to do so became final. Plaintiffs’ counsel apparently claimed that they were unaware of the deadline imposed under California procedural rules and that the court erred by dismissing the case on the basis of Dole’s purported ex parte application. See Law360,…
A federal court in California has preliminarily approved a $3 million settlement of claims by state Starbucks Corp. employees that the company denied them off-duty breaks because its busy stores were understaffed and the company required employees to take their breaks on-duty if only two employees were present. York v. Starbucks Corp., No. 08-7919 (C.D. Cal., order entered June 10, 2013). According to a news source, the court expressed some reservations about the incentive awards to the named plaintiffs, noting that the Ninth Circuit “seems to be taking an evermore-aggressive look at incentive awards and expecting the trial court to look closely at those things.” Additional information about the settlement appears in Issue 484 of this Update. See Law360, June 10, 2013.
A federal judge in California has notified the parties to a consumer-fraud action against the company that makes Mission® tortilla chips of her inclination to stay the litigation for six months and refer to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) the question “whether products containing GMO [genetically modified organisms] or bioengineered ingredients may properly be labeled ‘Natural’ or ‘All Natural.’” Cox v. Gruma Corp., No. 12-6502 (N.D. Cal., notice filed June 7, 2013). The plaintiffs have opposed the tentative stay order, arguing that a prompt regulatory determination is unlikely given FDA’s past inaction on the matter. They reportedly cited a recent Florida decision denying a soup company’s motion to dismiss similar litigation on preemption grounds because FDA does not regulate “Natural” or “All Natural” food labeling claims. The court, however, cited a Ninth Circuit ruling deferring to FDA’s regulatory authority so that the agency’s “considered judgments” would not be undermined…
