A federal magistrate in Florida has denied the plaintiffs’ request in multidistrict litigation challenging marketing claims that DHA Omega-3-fortified milk supports brain health to reconsider an earlier order excluding the testimony of their expert. In re Horizon Organic Milk Plus DHA Omega-3 Mktg. & Sales Practice Litig., MDL No. 2324 (S.D. Fla., order entered June 17, 2014). Details about the magistrate’s ruling excluding the plaintiffs’ expert appear in Issue 522 of this Update. The magistrate rejected the plaintiffs’ arguments for their failure to raise them when the motion to exclude the evidence was before him and determined that an intervening U.S. Food and Drug Administration final nutrient content rule on DHA is not new evidence and does not address the ground on which the magistrate struck the expert—his failure to show how the studies on which he relied could be extrapolated to cover the broad class of product purchasers. Issue…
Tag Archives Florida
A federal magistrate in Florida has decided that the opinion proffered by the plaintiffs’ expert in litigation challenging “brain health” marketing claims for algal-derived DHA Omega-3 fortified milk products is unreliable, thus granting the defendant’s motion to exclude it. In re Horizon Organic Milk Plus DHA Omega-3 Mktg. & Sales Practices Litig., MDL No. 12-2324 (S.D. Fla., order entered April 28, 2014). The ruling affects claims brought by consumers in six states alleging that the defendant violated state laws by falsely claiming that the DHA in its products “Supports Brain Health” and “Supports a Healthy Brain,” and that “competent, scientific evidence shows that these claims are false.” While the court found that most of the defendant’s arguments in support of exclusion went to the weight of the testimony rather than its admissibility, it agreed that the expert failed to show how small studies involving 49 women and 658 children in the…
Snack maker Snyder’s Lance, Inc. has filed a motion to dismiss an amended class complaint filed by representative plaintiffs alleging that the company misleads consumers by labeling its products as “natural” when they contain genetically modified ingredients. Barron v. Snyder’s Lance, Inc., No. 13-62496 (S.D. Fla., Miami Div., motion filed March 10, 2014). Among other matters, the company argues that the plaintiffs’ “premium price” theory of harm is not plausible, they lack standing to seek injunctive relief and their failure to address their understanding of the term “natural” is fatal to their claims. As to the price theory, Snyder’s-Lance contends that the plaintiffs’ claims require the court to assume that price differences between its products and those of “rival brands” are based solely on the “natural” labeling. According to the company, the alleged price differential could be due to any number of other factors, such as better taste, more appealing…
A federal court in Florida has dismissed, without prejudice, a putative statewide class action filed against Amy’s Kitchen, alleging that the company misleads consumers by identifying the sugar in its products as “evaporated cane juice” (ECJ). Reilly v. Amy’s Kitchen, Inc., No. 13-21525 (S.D. Fla., order entered March 7, 2014). The court agreed with the company that, because the court had previously dismissed claims as to products the representative plaintiff had not purchased, the plaintiff could not, at the time she filed the complaint, meet the Class Action Fairness Act’s (CAFA’s) jurisdictional threshold of $5 million. Information about the court’s earlier ruling appears in Issue 507 of this Update. While jurisdictional facts are assessed at the time of removal, and post-removal events do not deprive courts of subject matter jurisdiction under CAFA, “if a claim of the required jurisdictional amount is made in good faith, the claim controls unless it…
A putative statewide consumer-fraud class action has been filed in a Florida state court against Living Harvest Foods, Inc. over use of the term “evaporated cane juice” (ECJ) on food product labels rather than sugar. Miller v. Living Harvest Foods Inc., No. __ (Fla. Cir. Ct., Miami-Dade Cty., filed January 30, 2014). While the specific products at issue are not named, the plaintiff contends that the defendant “conceals the fact that its Products have added sugar by referring to the sugar as ECJ, a ‘healthy’ sounding name made up by the sugar industry years ago to sell sugar to ‘healthy’ food manufacturers to use in their consumer products. ECJ is not the common or usual name of any type of sweetener, or even any type of juice, and the use of such a name is false and misleading. Defendant uniformly lists ECJ as an ingredient on its Products, as well as…
A federal court in Florida has dismissed putative class claims in a consumer-fraud lawsuit to the extent they involve allegedly false “evaporated cane juice” (ECJ) labeling on Amy’s Kitchen food products that the named plaintiff did not purchase, but has otherwise allowed the remaining claims to proceed. Reilly v. Amy’s Kitchen, Inc., No. 13-21525 (S.D. Fla., order entered December 9, 2013). According to the court, in the Eleventh Circuit, plaintiffs have standing to assert claims based only on products they actually purchase thus rejecting the plaintiff’s argument that (i) she could bring claims involving products nearly identical to the purchased product and (ii) the issue was one of typicality and representation best resolved at the class certification stage. Because the plaintiff purchased just three Amy’s Kitchen products with ECJ listed as an ingredient on the label, she will be unable to pursue claims as to 57 other products. The court rejected…
For the second time in a month, attorneys with three Florida law firms have filed litigation on behalf of state consumers alleging that Anheuser-Busch Cos. (AB) sells a formerly imported beer “in a way that misleads consumers into believing that Kirin beer is still made in and imported from Japan, and accordingly sell[s] Kirin beer at prices substantially higher than those of domestic beer.” Suarez v. Anheuser Busch Cos., LLC, No. ___ (Fla. Cir. Ct., Miami-Dade Cty., filed October 25, 2013). Information about the Beck’s beer litigation, asserting virtually identical claims on behalf of a putative nationwide class against AB in federal court, appears in Issue 500 of this Update. Brought in the names of just two consumers, the Kirin beer litigation notes that external, six-pack, bottled beer packaging fails to state that the product “is brewed in the U.S.A. with domestic ingredients. In fact, the packaging for Kirin Beer…
A Florida resident has filed a complaint on behalf of a putative class against Anheuser-Busch Cos. (AB), claiming that since the company began producing Beck’s Beer in the United States in 2012, it has misled consumers into believing that the product is still imported from Germany where it was made with quality ingredients for more than 225 years. Marty v. Anheuser-Busch Cos., LLC, No. 13-23656 (S.D. Fla., filed October 9, 2013). According to the complaint, external packaging material does not indicate that the product is brewed in the United States with domestic ingredients, including Missouri River water. Rather, the external packaging for six- and 12-packs allegedly states that the product is “German Quality” beer “brewed under the German Purity Law of 1516” and that it “Originated in Bremen, Germany.” Individual bottles, however, state “in obscure white text on a silver background, ‘Product of USA—Brauerei Beck & Co.—St. Louis, MO.—12 FL. OZ.’”…
On behalf of current and former Benihana chefs, a former chef has filed an action under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) alleging that the company forced chefs to work off the clock without compensation, illegally deducted from the chefs’ tips to provide tips to employees not entitled to share them and harassed or fired the chefs if they complained about the practices. Kim v. Benihana Nat’l Corp., No. 13-62061 (S.D. Fla., filed September 20, 2013). Alleging unpaid overtime or minimum wages in the alternative, illegal tip deductions and retaliation, the plaintiff seeks an order requiring notice to all Benihana chefs, declaratory relief, damages, interest, attorney’s fees, and costs.
A Florida resident has filed a putative statewide class action against Gruma Corp., alleging that the company falsely advertises its Mission® Restaurant Style Tortilla chip products as “all natural” when they contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Griffith v. Gruma Corp., No. 13-80791 (S.D. Fla., filed August 12, 2013). Alleging violations of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and contending that her claims “mirror the labeling, packaging, and advertising requirements mandated by federal regulations and laws,” the plaintiff claims that the products are misbranded and the labels are false and misleading because GMOs are not natural and she understood that product representation to mean that the chips contained no GMO ingredients. Alleging damages in excess of $5 million, the plaintiff seeks injunctive relief, restitution, disgorgement, actual damages, attorney’s fees, costs, and interest.
