A California federal court has limited relief to monetary damages in a lawsuit alleging that Jelly Belly Candy Co. misleads consumers into believing its Sport Beans do not contain sugar because the term "evaporated cane juice" (ECJ) appears on the label instead. Gomez v. Jelly Belly Candy Co., No. 17-0575 (C.D. Cal., entered August 18, 2017). Additional details about the case appear in Issues 629 and 638 of this Update. The court found that to pursue California consumer-protection claims, the plaintiff must establish that she had no adequate remedy at law, but she failed to do so in an amended complaint. The only injury the plaintiff alleged was that she “lost money” because she purchased the product, the court stated, limiting her relief to that alleged loss. Issue 645
Tag Archives evaporated cane juice
A plaintiff’s “cursory, formulaic recitation” of her purchase of Jelly Belly Candy Co.'s Sport Beans did not include enough factual allegations to establish a claim for relief, a California federal court has ruled. Gomez v. Jelly Belly Candy Co., No. 17-0575 (C.D. Cal., order entered June 8, 2017). The plaintiff had alleged the candy maker’s use of the term “evaporated cane juice” (ECJ) on the packaging misled her about the product's sugar content. Additional details on the complaint appear in Issue 629 of this Update. “Absent from the Complaint are any factual allegations concerning the circumstances of Gomez’s purchase of the product, how she intended to use the product, whether she in fact expected a sugar-free product, whether she thought ‘evaporated cane juice’ was juice as opposed to sugar, and whether she consumed the product,” the court said, granting Jelly Belly's motion to dismiss. However, the court ruled that Gomez…
A California federal court has ruled that plaintiffs who admitted to reading Healthy Beverage’s website cannot sue the company for listing evaporated cane juice (ECJ) on the ingredient list rather than sugar. Swearingen v. Healthy Beverage, No. 13-4385 (N.D. Cal., order entered May 5, 2017). The plaintiffs initially filed a putative class action claiming Healthy Beverage misled consumers by listing evaporated cane juice on their product labels, but they later alleged in an amended complaint that the company’s website “is incorporated into the label for each of Defendants’ products” and that the website states “cane juice is natural sugar.” Given those allegations, the court dismissed the suit with prejudice, holding, “An allegation of reliance, which is necessary for all of plaintiffs’ claims” under California consumer protection laws and unjust enrichment, was “impossible . . . [t]he Court will not allow them a third bite at the apple to amend a…
A California plaintiff has filed suit against the makers of Jelly Belly Sport Beans claiming the candy maker’s labeling leads consumers to believe the product does not contain sugar. Gomez v. Jelly Belly Candy Co., No. 17-0575 (C.D. Cal., filed March 24, 2017). The complaint alleges the product label says Sport Beans contain “evaporated cane juice,” but not sugar or any other “commonly known sweetener.” The plaintiff claims such labeling violates a Food and Drug Administration guidance document advising manufacturers that the term “evaporated cane juice” is not the common or usual name of any type of sweetener and that the ingredient should be listed on product labels as sugar. The plaintiff also claims Sport Beans are marketed as “energizing,” containing “quick energy for sports performance,” as well as carbohydrates, electrolytes and vitamins. For allegations of negligent misrepresentation and California consumer-protection statute violations, the plaintiff seeks class certification, restitution, damages,…
A consumer has filed a putative class action against Dave’s Gourmet, Inc. alleging the company deceives its customers by listing evaporated cane juice (ECJ) on its sauce labels rather than the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) preferred term, sugar. Kazemi v. Dave’s Gourmet, Inc., No. 16-5269 (N.D. Cal., filed September 14, 2016). The complaint asserts that the plaintiff and other members of the putative class “would have paid less for the Products or would not have purchased the Products had they known that the Products’ listing of ECJ as an ingredient claim was false, misleading, and deceptive.” For alleged violations of California’s and Florida’s consumer-protection statutes, the plaintiff seeks class certification, injunctions, restitution, damages and attorney’s fees. Issue 618
Two lawsuits challenging the inclusion of “evaporated cane juice” (ECJ) on ingredient lists will continue in light of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) July 2016 nonbinding guidance recommending that “sugar” be listed instead. A California federal court refused to dismiss a lawsuit against Lifeway Foods alleging its kefir product packaging misled consumers into believing it contained no added sugar by including ECJ in the ingredients list. Figy v. Lifeway Foods Inc., No. 13-4828 (N.D. Cal., order entered August 16, 2016). The court found the plaintiff’s claims to be properly pleaded and was not persuaded by Lifeway’s argument that the expiration dates on the labels attached to the complaint suggested that the products were purchased after the plaintiff knew what ECJ is because the labels were merely examples of the product packaging rather than the specific products the plaintiff purchased. Details about Lifeway’s motion to the court arguing the…
Following the release of U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) final guidance finding that “evaporated cane juice” (ECJ) should be labeled as “sugar” on food products, Lifeway Foods has filed a motion arguing that the May 2016 rule should not affect the outcome of a consumer’s lawsuit against the company arguing it mislabeled its kefir smoothies. Figy v. Lifeway Foods Inc., No. 13-4828 (N.D. Cal., San Francisco Div., motion filed June 13, 2016). The case is one of many stayed or dismissed without prejudice awaiting FDA guidance after the agency announced it would reconsider the issue in March 2014. In its motion, Lifeway argues that the guidance is “intended to advise” and “does not establish any rights for any person and is not binding on the FDA or the public.” “The Guidance has no more bearing on Plaintiff’s claims under California’s consumer protection statutes than it has on his common…
A California federal court has dismissed without leave to amend several claims in a lawsuit alleging that Whole Foods Market fraudulently and misleadingly labeled its 365 Everyday Value ketchup, oatmeal and chicken broth as containing “evaporated cane juice” (ECJ) rather than “sugar.” Pratt v. Whole Food Mkt. Cal., Inc., No. 12-5652 (N.D. Cal., San Jose Div., order entered September 30, 2015). The plaintiff alleged that because Whole Foods failed to use the most common name for the ingredient—as mandated by U.S. Food and Drug Administration rules—the products were misbranded and “cannot be legally sold, possessed, have no economic value, and are legally worthless.” The court first dismissed strict liability allegations, finding that the plaintiff sought to impose a requirement inconsistent with federal law. Turning to the plausibility of the plaintiff’s allegations, the court found his reliance claims contradictory because one claim required him to know nothing about ECJ while the…
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has told a California federal court that the agency will not issue guidance until 2016 about the use of “evaporated cane juice” (ECJ)—which plaintiffs nationwide assert is merely sugar—on food and beverage labeling. Swearingen v. Late July Snacks LLC, No. 13-4324 (N.D. Cal., agency letter filed July 13, 2015); Swearingen v. Healthy Beverage LLC, No. 13-4385 (N.D. Cal., agency letter filed July 13, 2015). The court issued an order in May 2015 requesting FDA to indicate whether the agency would issue guidance within 180 days. “FDA is actively working on a final guidance to address this issue,” Associate Commissioner for Policy Leslie Kux writes. “However, because of competing priorities, FDA cannot commit to issuing a decision within 180 days. . . . We have received a substantial number of comments and extensive amounts of supporting materials. FDA is obligated to review and consider…
A consumer has filed a proposed class action against Whole Foods Market Group Inc. alleging that the company’s Gluten Free All-Natural Nutmeal Raisin Cookies list evaporated cane juice (ECJ) as an ingredient to mislead consumers about the amount of sugar contained in the product. Bryant v. Whole Foods Mkt. Grp. Inc., No. 15-1001 (E.D. Mo., removed to federal court June 25, 2015). The complaint, originally filed in Missouri state court in April, asserts that ECJ should be listed as sugar under the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA’s) rule that food labels use the most common or usual name of an ingredient. According to the April complaint, the plaintiff seeks class certification and damages. The lawsuit joins a wave of litigation against food manufacturers presenting the same argument. Several courts have dismissed the cases without prejudice or granted stays after FDA indicated that it would publish updated guidance about ECJ.…
