A California resident has filed a putative class action on behalf of statewide and nationwide classes alleging that Safeway, Inc. labels and promotes its Open Nature waffle products as “100% Natural” while using the synthetic chemical preservative, alternatively referred to as sodium acid pyrophosphate and disodium dihydrogen pyrophosphate, as an ingredient. Richards v. Safeway, Inc., No. 13-4317 (N.D. Cal., filed September 18, 2013). According to the plaintiff, the chemical “has various applications—from its use in leather treatment to remove iron stains on hides during processing, to stabilizing hydrogen peroxide solutions against reduction, to facilitating hair removal in hog slaughter, to feather removal from birds in poultry slaughter, to use in petroleum production.” According to the plaintiff, the ingredient is not listed on the front of the package with the other ingredients. Claiming that he relied on the company’s “100% Natural” claims in purchasing products for which he paid a premium, the…
Tag Archives grocery
California’s pesticide regulator has reportedly filed a petition against Whole Foods alleging that several of its pet products, including cat litter and dog and cat flea spray, contain pesticides that have not been registered with the state. Cal. Dep’t of Pesticide Registration v. Whole Foods Mkt. Cal., Inc., No. 2013-00150499 (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., filed September 9, 2013). State law evidently requires pre approval of pesticide products so they can be tested and approved for safe use. The company is reportedly cooperating with the state and has indicated that it “looks forward to addressing the matter before a judge.” If Whole Foods has violated state law, California may impose fines. According to an agency spokesperson, failure to register pesticide products has been an ongoing issue with the Austin-based retail grocery chain and the agency intends to investigate it for a range of purportedly unregistered products. See Huffington Post, September…
A federal court in Washington has dismissed without prejudice a number of claims in a putative class action alleging that the producer and seller of a vitamin water product misled consumers by failing to disclose that the product contains caffeine or its relative amount and falsely represents that the product is a “natural tonic” and contains “natural caffeine.” Maple v. Costco Wholesale Corp., No. 12-5166 (E.D. Wash., order entered August 1, 2013). While the court determined that the plaintiff had standing by rejecting Costco’s contention that the labeling on one product unit was not visible through the packaging encasing the variety packs in which it is sold, it found that federal law preempts claims that the defendants were required to disclose the presence of caffeine or state its relative amount in the drink. Among the claims that the court dismissed for insufficient pleading were (i) violation of the state’s consumer…
The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), other advocacy groups and local public health officials have sent letters to the CEOs of supermarkets and pharmacies urging them to “encourage customers to purchase healthier, no- and low-calorie drinks in place of higher calorie sugar drinks to improve customers’ health, as well as boost [their] company’s reputation for social responsibility and caring for the health of its customers.” The letters cite scientific studies purportedly demonstrating that “sugar drinks (carbonated or not) are a major contributor to the obesity epidemic,” “the single largest source of calories in many Americans’ diets,” and “the only food or beverage that has been directly linked to obesity.” “With supermarkets [and pharmacies] selling the lion’s share of sugar drinks, your company and others clearly have an opportunity to promote your customers’ health by encouraging customers to switch from high-calorie to low-calorie drinks,” the letters assert. “Possibilities…
Two California residents who recently sued Trader Joe’s for allegedly misbranding certain foods by using “organic evaporated cane juice” on its product labels have filed a putative nationwide class action against a yogurt company with similar allegations. Gitson v. Clover Stornetta Farms, Inc., No. 13-1517 (N.D. Cal., filed April 4, 2013). Details about the Trader Joe’s lawsuit appear in Issue 477 of this Update. The named plaintiffs contend that the defendant markets some 14 different flavors of its yogurt products, all of which list “organic evaporated cane juice” as an ingredient on their labels “in violation of a number of labeling regulations.” They cite Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance, warning letters and an open letter to demonstrate that use of this term for a yogurt sweetener is “illegal.” The plaintiffs also target the company’s websites for their alleged used of “illegal claims.” According to the complaint, they relied on…
Three California residents have filed a putative class action against food retailer Trader Joe’s in federal court, alleging three different types of misleading labeling claims: using the terms “evaporated cane juice” or “organic evaporated cane juice,” identifying as “natural” or “no added coloring or preservatives” foods that contain added preservatives and artificial colors, and representing non-dairy calcium products as “milk.” Gitson v. Trader Joe’s Co., No. 13-1333 (N.D. Cal., filed March 25, 2013). The plaintiffs claim that the company’s “labeling, advertising and marketing as alleged herein are false and misleading and were designed to increase sales of the products at issue. Defendant’s misrepresentations are part of an extensive labeling, advertising and marketing campaign, and a reasonable person would attach importance to Defendant’s misrepresentations in determining whether to purchase the products at issue.” The complaint outlines the applicable Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations that the defendant allegedly violated, noting that…
In an effort to combat marketing to children, a Washington, D.C.-based organic grocer has stopped stocking products whose packaging features cartoon characters from books, movies and TV programs. According to a MOM’s Organic Market news release, products such as Dora the Explorer frozen soybeans will be replaced with alternatives in cartoon-free packaging. “Marketing to children is wrong and should be illegal,” said MOM’s founder and CEO Scott Nash. “Advertising is a shady game. It focuses on creating a shallow emotional attachment instead of pointing out the merits of a product. Unfortunately, it works—and young children are particularly susceptible.” “Using beloved media characters to sell kids on a particular brand of food is wrong, even if it’s healthy food,” said Susan Linn, Director of the Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood. “Children should not be trained to pick foods based on the cartoon on the box. We congratulate MOM’s for taking…
An Edmonton, Alberta, resident has filed a putative class action against a beef processor with operations in Alberta and Nebraska, alleging that he became severely ill from consuming the company’s beef, which was recalled in September 2012 due to an E. coli outbreak. Harrison v. XL Foods Inc., No. 1203-14727 (Can. Alta. Q.B., filed October 2, 2012). Seeking to certify province-wide and nationwide classes of plaintiffs “who purchased and/or consumed the Recalled Products,” the plaintiff alleges strict liability, breach of the Fair Trading Act, negligence, waiver of tort/disgorgement, and vicarious liability. He requests punitive and actual damages, as well as non-pecuniary general damages, pecuniary damages, disgorgement of revenues, attorney’s fees, costs, and interest. He also seeks a declaration that the recalled products are contaminated. According to news sources, plaintiff Matthew Harrison fell ill after eating allegedly contaminated steak, purchased at a Costco store, at a friend’s house. He was purportedly…
Finding that California law applies to a dispute between Costco Wholesale Corp. and Nationwide Mutual Insurance Co., a federal court has dismissed Costco’s claims for violations of Washington state law and for bad faith coverage by estoppel arising out of the insurer’s refusal to handle claims of personal injury from cheese that Costco sold. Costco Wholesale Corp. v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co., No. 11-1550 (W.D. Wash., Seattle, decided September 20, 2012). The court determined that, under the “most significant relationship” test applied in the context of a conflict of laws, “the most significant contacts between Costco and Nationwide occurred in California.” Because California law does not provide relief as to a number of Costco’s claims, the court dismissed them but gave the company the opportunity to amend the complaint by November 1, 2012. If it does not do so, the matter will be dismissed.
A California resident has filed a putative class action against Ralphs Grocery Co. alleging that it breached its promise not to share the personal information that shoppers must provide to obtain a “Ralphs rewards Card”; only cardholders may purportedly take advantage of advertised store discounts. Heller v. Ralphs Grocery Co., No. BC486035 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed June 6, 2012). He contends that he would not have shopped at the grocery stores or applied for a rewards card “if not for Defendant’s misrepresentation and/or nondisclosure of the fact that it was selling and/or sharing its customers’ personal identification information.” According to the complaint, the defendant shares customer information with Kroger and with dunnhumby, a company that allegedly “performs data mining services for more than 350 million people in 25 countries on behalf of retailers” and “uses personal identification information and data from purchase transactions gleaned from the Ralph’s reward Card…
