A Connecticut plaintiff filed a projected class action against Subway after DNA testing of the chain’s chicken sandwiches allegedly showed the meat was only 42 to 53 percent chicken and the remainder was processed soy. Moskowitz v. Doctor’s Associates Inc., No. 17-0387 (D. Conn., filed March 1, 2017). Researchers affiliated with the Canadian Broadcasting Company’s “Marketplace” news show apparently found that the meat used in Subway’s oven-roasted chicken items was only 53.6 percent chicken, while the meat used in the sweet onion teriyaki items was only 42.8 percent chicken. The plaintiff claims that Subway is “disseminating false and misleading information via advertising, marketing, its website, and menu intended to trick unsuspecting customers, into believing they are purchasing chicken for their money, rather than Sandwiches and Chicken Strips containing a multitude of ingredients.” The complaint alleges violations of the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, breach of…
Tag Archives Connecticut
A Connecticut federal court has reportedly approved the dismissal of Pepperidge Farm's lawsuit against Trader Joe's Co. alleging the grocery infringed Pepperidge Farm's trademarked Milano® cookies. Pepperidge Farm v. Trader Joe's Co., No. 15-1774 (D. Conn., order entered March 9, 2016). The lawsuit challenged Trader Joe's Crispy Cookies, which Pepperidge Farm asserted were the same shape and sold in similar packaging to Milano® cookies. The order is the first legal filing in the case since the lawsuit was filed in December 2015; an attorney for Pepperidge Farm told Law360 that the parties had reached a "mutually satisfactory resolution." Additional information about the complaint appears in Issue 586 of this Update. See Law360, March 10, 2016. Issue 598
Pepperidge Farm, maker of Milano® cookies, has filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against Trader Joe’s Co. alleging the retailer’s Crispy Cookies emulate the shape and configuration of Milano® cookies. Pepperidge Farm, Inc. v. Trader Joe’s Co., No. 15-1774 (D. Conn., filed December 2, 2015). In addition to the similarity between the cookie products, Pepperidge Farm alleges that the packaging of Crispy Cookies is similar as well. Although Crispy Cookies packaging depicts the cookies in a fluted paper tray—as Milano® cookies are sold—Trader Joe’s actually packages the cookies in a plastic tray inside the external packaging. Pepperidge Farm cites Google search results for “‘Trader Joe’s,’ ‘cookie’ and ‘Milano’” as evidence that consumers have also noted the similarities between the two products. Pepperidge Farm seeks declarations of infringement, permanent injunctions, damages and attorney’s fees. Issue 586
According to a news source, a 600-pound man, who worked as a Hometown Buffet restaurant manager, has filed a lawsuit under the Americans with Disabilities Act against OCB Restaurant Co. in a Connecticut federal court, alleging that he was fired and replaced with a worker who “is not morbidly obese and does not suffer from chronic knee pain.” Flanders v. OCB Restaurant Co., LLC, No. 14-1239 (D. Conn., filed August 27, 2014). See Courthouse News Service, August 28, 2014. Issue 536
While Connecticut enacted legislation (H.B. 6527) in June 2013 requiring that foods containing genetically modified (GM) ingredients be labeled as such, once neighboring states have adopted similar laws, Governor Daniel Malloy (D) held a ceremonial bill signing in a health food café in Fairfield on December 11, 2013. Now known as Public Act 13-183, the bill’s provisions are summarized in Issue 486 of this Update. The governor said, “I am proud that leaders from each of the legislative caucuses can come together to make our state the first in the nation to require the labeling of GMOs. The end result is a law that shows our commitment to consumers’ right to know while catalyzing other states to take similar action.” See Press Release of Governor Daniel Malloy, December 11, 2013.
Connecticut lawmakers have passed a bipartisan bill (H.B. 6527) that will require labeling on foods that contain genetically modified (GM) ingredients, making it the first state in the nation to enact such legislation. Designated as “An Act Concerning Genetically-Engineered Food,” the bill was unanimously passed in the Senate and by a 134-3 vote in the House. Governor Dan Malloy (D) has reportedly indicated that the final step in its passage, his signature, will “not be an issue.” “This is important stuff. . . and I think the rest of the world is starting to understand that.” The bill’s passage came after House and Senate conferees reached a compromise following debate over a different version of the proposal. At issue was whether to allow the law to take effect automatically or to attach a “trigger” that would require neighboring states to pass similar legislation before Connecticut’s law would be implemented and enforced. The final…
A scientist who was accused of falsifying data in research on the purported health benefits of red wine has reportedly sued the University of Connecticut, claiming that it wrongfully dismissed him and violated his civil rights in doing so. Das v. Univ. of Conn. Bd. of Trustees, No. 13-6039748 (Conn. Super. Ct., Hartford, filed March 5, 2013). Dipak Das alleges that he was not allowed to introduce exhibits and testimony or to cross-examine witnesses during his five-day dismissal hearing, the culmination of an investigation that apparently found that he had fabricated and falsified data. He also alleges that the university notified 11 scientific journals before the investigative report on which the termination was based had been completed to advise them that he had “committed research misconduct,” and that the university did this “as a means of coercing the plaintiff into settling by harming his reputation and standing in the scientific community.”…
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) has denied a motion seeking to consolidate and transfer to a multidistrict litigation court three cases filed in federal courts against companies allegedly responsible for a 2009 E. coli outbreak involving contaminated ground beef. In re: Ne. Contaminated Beef Prods. Liab. Litig., MDL No. 2346 (J.P.M.L., D. Conn., decided April 17, 2012). According to the court, the cases do not “contain significant overlapping questions of fact sufficient to warrant centralization of the few involved actions,” and “the likelihood that additional actions will be filed concerning this E. coli outbreak—which occurred nearly two and a half years ago and affected under 30 individuals—seems low. With only three actions pending in two adjacent districts involved in this litigation, movant has failed to convince us that centralization is needed.” The court indicated that it would be “practicable and preferable” for the parties, courts and counsel to informally…
A federal court in Connecticut has ordered the payment of $1.9 million in equitable restitution to consumers who purchased Chinese Diet Tea and Bio-Slim Patch in 2003-2004. FTC v. Bronson Partners, LLC, No. 04-1866 (D. Conn., decided December 4, 2009). The court determined in 2008 that the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC’s) claims of false advertising against the defendants had merit and issued this ruling to explain the basis for its damages award and why it was not allowing any offsets to the defendants from the gross amounts they received for all of the products sold. Essentially, the court found that the defendants’ poor recordkeeping and legal precedent did not allow offsets for credit card refunds, bounced checks, operating expenses, or revenue generated by reorders, which defendants claimed represented satisfied customers. According to the court, reorders could also have represented customers who “had not yet achieved the results promised in the…
Connecticut residents have filed a putative class action in state court against several fast food companies alleging that they violated consumer protection laws by selling grilled chicken products containing a carcinogenic chemical without providing warnings. Delio v. McDonald’s Corp., No. __ (Conn. Super. Ct., Hartford Cty., filed October 21, 2009). They seek to represent a class of all individuals who purchased and ingested these products in Connecticut and allege that the defendants knew or should have known that PhIP is formed when chicken is grilled and that it “has no safe level for ingestion.” The named plaintiffs, who are represented by The Cancer Project, a Washington, D.C.-based nonprofit organization, seek warning signs, actual damages, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees. The complaint refers to scientific research on PhIP and notes that California placed it on its list of chemicals known to the state to cause cancer in 1994 and that the…
12
