The French Parliament has reportedly voted to prohibit the use of meat and dairy terms to describe plant-based substitutes such as vegetarian sausage or vegan bacon. The measure follows a 2017 European Court of Justice ruling that plant-based products cannot be marketed with terms such as “milk” or “butter.” Violations of the ban may lead to fines of up to €300,000.
Tag Archives vegetarian/vegan
A New York federal court has held that a vegetarian who alleged Buffalo Wild Wings charged a premium price for non-meat food items fried in beef tallow failed to plead any injury in her complaint because loss of the purchase price does not constitute “actual injury” under state consumer-protection law. Borenkoff v. Buffalo Wild Wings, No. 16-8532 (S.D.N.Y., entered January 19, 2018). Although it was a “close call,” the court held that the plaintiff had standing to sue, finding “some ‘concrete and particularized’ injury in paying for one item and receiving another, even if you ultimately receive the ‘benefit of your bargain’ from a purely objective economic standpoint.” However, the alleged economic injury was insufficient to state a claim, the court held, because the plaintiff failed to explain “exactly how” the cost of the food was affected by the use of beef tallow or why she believed she paid a premium.…
A Tennessee federal court has ruled that a personal-injury lawsuit against Whole Foods Market can proceed because the plaintiffs did not plead that they were “practicing vegans” and therefore could not be expected to know that a vegan pizza product might contain nuts. Jones v. WFM-WO, No. 17-0749 (M.D. Tenn., order entered July 17, 2017). The plaintiff alleged that she bought two slices of “Vegan Garden Pizza” from a Whole Foods bakery, relying on the label indicating that the pizza “did not contain certain nuts and/or ingredients derived from nut products.” After her daughter ate the pizza and suffered an allergic reaction requiring hospitalization, the plaintiff called the store and talked to the department manager, who reportedly told her the pizza was “mislabeled” and that an employee had prepared it using a taco sauce containing crushed pecans. Whole Foods argued that the pizza was exempt from the warning-label requirements of…
A New York consumer has filed a lawsuit against Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc. (BWW) alleging the company misleads vegetarian customers into believing the restaurant chain offers vegetarian fare when certain offerings are actually cooked in beef tallow. Borenkoff v. Buffalo Wild Wings, Inc., No. 8532 (S.D.N.Y., filed November 2, 2016). The complaint asserts that BWW does not disclose its use of beef tallow in its menu descriptions, nutritional information or website, and further, the usage departs from the industry standard of non-beef cooking oil. The plaintiff seeks class certification, an injunction, compensatory and punitive damages, costs and attorney’s fees for an alleged violation of New York’s consumer-protection statute and unjust enrichment. Issue 621
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued the results of a study finding that dark chocolate products may contain milk that is not declared on other labels. According to a February 11, 2015, consumer update, the agency tested dark chocolate bars for the presence of milk after dividing them into categories based on their labeling: (i) those that included precautionary statements such as “may contain milk” or “may contain traces of milk”; (ii) those labeled “dairy-free” or “allergen-free”; (iii) those that made no mention of milk on the label; and (iv) those with inconsistent labels—for example, a “vegan” product with a label indicating the possible presence of milk traces. The results evidently identified milk in (i) two of the 17 dark chocolates labeled “dairy-free” or “allergen-free”; (ii) 55 of the 93 products that gave no clear indication of the presence of milk in the products; and (iii) all…
A Jewish California resident who claims to be a vegetarian has filed a putative class action against Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., alleging that the company failed to adequately warn consumers that its pinto beans are prepared with or contain bacon or pork. Shenkman v. Chipotle Mex. Grill, Inc., No. BC467980 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed August 19, 2011). According to the complaint, the company does not disclose in its in-store menus that pinto beans contain pork, and, when specifically asked, employees informed the plaintiff that the pinto beans did not contain bacon or pork. Relying on these representations, the plaintiff purportedly purchased and ate the beans to his detriment, financial and otherwise. The plaintiff seeks to certify a class of California residents who “abstain from consuming bacon or pork” for “ethical, religious, moral, cultural philosophical, or health-related reasons” and purchased the pinto beans from any Chipotle restaurant in California…
A New Jersey appellate court has partially reinstated a lawsuit against an Indian restaurant that mistakenly served meat samosas to a group of Hindu vegetarians, who are now seeking compensation for emotional distress and to recover the cost of traveling to India for a purification rite. Gupta v. Asha Enterprises, L.L.C., A-3059-09T2 (N.J. Sup. Ct., decided July 18, 2011). According to the court opinion, plaintiffs notified Moghul Express & Catering Co. of their “strict vegetarian” status and were twice “assured of the vegetarian nature of the food,” which actually contained meat. The complaint alleges that this oversight caused the diners spiritual injury and involved them “in the sinful cycle of inflicting pain, injury and death on God’s [creations], and it affects the karma and the dharma, or purity of the soul.” Although the New Jersey Superior Court initially dismissed the claims of negligence, negligent infliction of emotional distress, consumer fraud, products…
A recent study based on a 27,670 cohort enrolled in the European Prospective Investigation in Cancer and Nutrition has allegedly concluded that participants who limited their intake of meat and animal products reduced their risk for developing cataracts by as much as 40 percent. Paul Appleby, et al., “Diet, vegetarianism, and cataract risk,” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, published online March 23, 2011. Dividing subjects into groups ranging from those with the highest meat consumption to those who avoided meat and animal products altogether, researchers evidently found “a strong relation between cataract risk and diet group, with a progressive decrease in risk of cataract in high meat eaters to low meat eaters, fish eaters (participants who ate fish but not meat), vegetarians, and vegans.” The results reportedly indicated that, compared with those who ate the most meat, vegetarians reduced their cataract risk by 30 percent and vegans by 40 percent.
AlterNet recently interviewed musician Moby on the publication of his new book, Gristle: From Factory Farms to Food Safety (Thinking Twice About the Meat We Eat), edited with food policy activist Miyun Park. According to the March 31, 2010, interview, the vegan manifesto is “a medley of anti-industrial meat memes written by an eclectic mix of advocates, experts and others who offer 10 compelling reasons for eliminating factory-farmed animal products from our diet.” The popular DJ touted his tome as “more factual and informative than most other animal-oriented books,” decrying what he described as the deliberate deception of agribusiness firms, “which maintain a PR ethos of egregious obfuscation.” Dismissing claims that Gristle contributes to a spate of “glitzy celebrity propaganda campaigns,” Moby pointedly declined to quibble with the term “conscientious carnivore” and conceded that “[a] carnivore who eats local chickens and is loving and nice to everyone around him is probably…
A Jewish California resident who follows kosher practices has filed a putative class action on behalf of Hari Krishnas, Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Taoists, Sikhs, Muslims and Jews against Panda Express, Inc., claiming that the restaurant chain fails to disclose that its vegetable menu items are actually made with significant amounts of chicken stock. Adelpour v. Panda Express, Inc., No. BC425869 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., filed November 12, 2009). The plaintiff alleges that the company does not state in its restaurants, promotional materials or online that its vegetable dishes, such as “Mixed Veggies,” “Eggplant Tofu,” “Chow Mein,” and “Fried Rice,” are prepared with chicken stock and that she was led to believe that these dishes were vegetarian. She also alleges that she was “explicitly informed” by company servers or shift supervisors that such menu items were vegetarian. The named plaintiff seeks to certify a class of “All California residents…
12
