The following is a summary of relevant, notable Class Action Lawsuits that were filed during December 2024. Below is a summary of the plaintiff’s allegations. To request a copy of a particular complaint or for queries or further discussion, you’re welcome to reach out via email at [email protected].
1. Alcabes v. Barilla America
Plaintiff Jonathan Alcabes filed a class action lawsuit against Barilla America Inc., alleging deceptive advertising of its Mulino Bianco Baiocchi cookies. The lawsuit claims that Barilla misrepresents the cookies as containing a generous amount of hazelnut and cocoa cream, showing images of cream oozing from the cookies on the packaging. However, the actual product allegedly contains much less filling, misleading consumers who expect a richer product.
The plaintiff argues that Barilla’s deceptive marketing induced consumers to purchase the cookies under false pretenses, violating New York’s General Business Law. The lawsuit seeks damages and corrective action to prevent future misleading advertisements.
2. Andris v. Goat Eats
Plaintiff Lisa Andris filed a class action lawsuit against Goat Eats LLC, alleging false advertising regarding its Goat Eats Original All Purpose Seasoning. The product is marketed as “All Natural,” but lab testing allegedly reveals that it contains calcium silicate, a synthetic ingredient used to prevent caking.
The lawsuit argues that Goat Eats knowingly misled consumers, capitalizing on the demand for natural products to charge a premium. Andris claims that this misrepresentation violates the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act (MMPA) and seeks damages and an injunction requiring Goat Eats to correct its labeling.
3. Banks v. Moran Foods
Plaintiff Crystal Banks filed a class action lawsuit against Moran Foods, LLC, alleging deceptive marketing of Fairhill Farms and Pickwell Farms fruit products. The labels prominently state that the products are “IN 100% FRUIT JUICE,” leading consumers to believe the juice contains no added ingredients. However, the lawsuit claims the juice also contains citric acid, a synthetic preservative.
The plaintiff argues that this misrepresentation misleads consumers into believing the fruit products are more natural than they actually are, violating the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act. She seeks damages and a court order requiring the company to correct its packaging.
4. Barrales v. Newell
Plaintiff Tinamarie Barrales filed a class action lawsuit against Newell Brands Inc., claiming false advertising of its Nuk baby bottles. The bottles are marketed as “BPA Free”, but the lawsuit alleges that they contain harmful microplastics, which can be ingested by infants, especially when the bottles are heated.
The lawsuit argues that Newell omitted this crucial information from its packaging, misleading parents into believing the product is safer than it actually is. Barrales seeks damages, corrective advertising, and an injunction to stop deceptive marketing of baby bottles containing microplastics.
5. Beekman v. Hershey
Plaintiff Bernadette Beekman filed a class action lawsuit against The Hershey Company, alleging that its chocolate products are contaminated with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), also known as “forever chemicals.” The lawsuit claims these harmful chemicals migrate from food packaging to the chocolate itself.
Beekman argues that Hershey fails to disclose this contamination, misleading consumers into purchasing what they believe to be safe products. The lawsuit seeks damages and an injunction requiring Hershey to disclose the presence of PFAS in its packaging and products.
6. Blanco v. Mondelez
Plaintiffs Ivan Blanco and Kathryn Swiggum filed a class action lawsuit against Mondelez International, Nabisco, and Mondelez Global, alleging that Wheat Thins crackers are falsely advertised as “100% Whole Grain.” The lawsuit claims that the product contains cornstarch, a refined grain, contradicting the claim that all grain ingredients are whole.
The plaintiffs argue that Mondelez’s deceptive labeling causes consumers to pay a premium, believing they are purchasing a fully whole grain product. They seek damages and a requirement that the company correct its packaging to accurately reflect the ingredients.
7. Burns v. Emergy
Plaintiff Mario Burns filed a class action lawsuit against Emergy Inc., alleging false advertising of its Eat Meati plant-based meat substitutes. The lawsuit claims that the company misrepresents its “Mushroom Root Classic Cutlets” and “Mushroom Root Classic Steaks” as being made primarily from mushrooms when, in reality, they contain mycelium—a fungal root system that is distinct from actual mushrooms.
Burns argues that this misbranding misleads consumers into thinking they are purchasing a whole-food-based product, when in reality, the primary ingredient is Neurospora crassa, a type of mold. The lawsuit seeks damages and a court order requiring accurate labeling of the product’s true ingredients.
8. Cross v. Madhava Honey
Plaintiffs Josephine Cross and Scott Aschenbrenner filed a class action lawsuit against Madhava Honey Ltd., alleging false advertising and unfair competition. The lawsuit claims that Madhava markets its olive and avocado oils as “clean” and “pure,” yet independent lab testing revealed significant levels of toxic phthalates—harmful chemicals linked to reproductive and developmental health risks.
The plaintiffs argue that Madhava falsely capitalized on the clean food movement, misleading consumers into purchasing products at a premium price under the belief they were free from toxic substances. The lawsuit seeks damages, injunctive relief, and a corrective advertising campaign to prevent further misleading marketing.
9. Daly v. Dunkin’
Plaintiff Cassandra Daly filed a class action lawsuit against Dunkin’ Brands and Inspire Brands, alleging that Dunkin’s Refresher beverages mislead consumers by naming fruits that are not actually present in the drinks. For example, the Mango Pineapple Refresher contains no mango or pineapple, and the Strawberry Dragonfruit Refresher contains no strawberry or dragonfruit.
Daly claims that Dunkin’ deceived consumers into paying a premium for fruit-based drinks that are mostly water, sugar, and green tea. She seeks monetary damages, injunctive relief, and revised labeling to accurately reflect the ingredients in the beverages.
10. Davey v. Walmart
Plaintiff Tracy Davey filed a class action lawsuit against Walmart Inc., alleging false advertising of its food products labeled as containing ‘natural flavors’. The lawsuit claims that Walmart promotes certain fruit-flavored products as being naturally flavored, when in reality, they contain artificial flavoring agents.
Davey argues that Walmart’s deceptive labeling practices violate consumer protection laws, leading customers to believe they are purchasing healthier, naturally flavored food products. The lawsuit seeks damages, an injunction, and corrective advertising.
11. Diaz v. Beliv
Plaintiff Melanie Diaz filed a class action lawsuit against Beliv, LLC, claiming false advertising on its Petit brand fruit nectars. The lawsuit alleges that Beliv falsely labels its drinks as containing ‘No Preservatives’, while in reality, they contain citric acid and ascorbic acid, both of which are classified as preservatives under FDA regulations.
Diaz argues that Beliv’s misleading labeling caused consumers to pay a premium, believing they were purchasing a healthier, preservative-free product. The lawsuit seeks damages, restitution, and corrective labeling to ensure accurate ingredient disclosure.
12. Espinoza v. Redcon1
Plaintiff Gabriel Espinoza filed a class action lawsuit against Redcon1, LLC, alleging that the company misrepresents the sodium content in its MRE BAR Whole Food Protein Bar. The lawsuit claims that Redcon1’s nutrition label understates the actual sodium content by over 20%, making the product misbranded and unfit for sale under California law.
Espinoza seeks injunctive relief requiring accurate labeling, monetary damages, and a refund for all consumers who purchased the mislabeled bars.
13. Flood v. Beliv
Plaintiff Emily Flood filed a class action lawsuit against Beliv, LLC, challenging the “No Preservatives” claim on its Oca plant-based energy drinks. The lawsuit alleges that Beliv’s drinks contain citric acid, which is recognized by the FDA as a preservative, making the labeling false and misleading.
Flood argues that Beliv charged a premium for falsely advertised products, misleading consumers who actively sought preservative-free drinks. She seeks damages, restitution, and a labeling correction to prevent further deceptive marketing.
14. Gamino v. Riverside Natural Foods
Plaintiff Tiana Gamino filed a class action lawsuit against Riverside Natural Foods Inc., alleging contamination of its MadeGood granola bars with metal fragments. The lawsuit claims that the company failed to disclose the presence of metal in its products, misleading consumers who expected safe and uncontaminated food.
Gamino argues that Riverside Natural Foods knew or should have known about the metal contamination, yet continued selling the products without warning consumers. The lawsuit seeks damages, recalls, and enhanced safety measures to prevent future contamination.
15. Gomez v. Century Snacks
Plaintiff Tracie Gomez filed a class action lawsuit against Century Snacks, LLC, alleging false advertising of its Snak Club brand products. The lawsuit claims that the products are marketed as containing “No Preservatives”, but actually contain citric acid and silicon dioxide—both of which act as preservatives.
Gomez argues that Century Snacks intentionally misled consumers, leading them to believe they were purchasing a higher-quality, preservative-free snack. She seeks damages, injunctive relief, and corrective labeling.
16. Greene v. Piping Rock
Plaintiff Andrea Greene filed a class action lawsuit against Piping Rock Health Products d/b/a Natural Vitality, alleging that its CALM Gummies Magnesium Supplement misstates the actual magnesium content. The product claims to contain 330 mg of magnesium per serving, but the lawsuit alleges that it contains significantly less than advertised.
Greene argues that Natural Vitality’s misleading labeling violates federal supplement labeling laws, deceiving consumers into believing they were getting a higher dose of magnesium than they actually received. She seeks damages, restitution, and an injunction to prevent further deceptive marketing.
17. Jack v. Target
Plaintiff George Jack filed a class action lawsuit against Target Corporation, alleging false advertising of its naturally flavored products. The lawsuit claims that Target promotes certain food items as ‘naturally flavored,’ when in reality, they contain synthetic flavoring agents.
Jack argues that Target’s misleading labeling practices violate consumer protection laws, causing customers to believe they are purchasing healthier, naturally flavored food products. The lawsuit seeks damages, injunctive relief, and corrective advertising.
18. Keegan v. Lee et al.
Plaintiff Brian Keegan filed a class action lawsuit against Michael Lee, Marie Sarte, and Grizzly Peak Media, alleging fraudulent misrepresentation and illegal distribution of an adulterated supplement called SkyFeel. The lawsuit claims that SkyFeel is marketed as an all-natural remedy for erectile dysfunction, but laboratory testing revealed that it contains Sildenafil (the active ingredient in Viagra) at dangerously high levels—well above the maximum recommended prescription dose.
Keegan argues that the defendants knowingly concealed the presence of this pharmaceutical ingredient to circumvent FDA regulations and deceive consumers into believing they were purchasing a natural product. The lawsuit seeks injunctive relief, consumer refunds, and punitive damages for the intentional misbranding and illegal distribution of an unapproved drug.
19. Lovett v. Stop & Shop
Plaintiff Ernestine Lovett filed a class action lawsuit against Stop & Shop Supermarket Company LLC, alleging that the company misrepresents its food products as containing “natural flavors” when they, in fact, include artificial additives. The complaint highlights how modern consumers are increasingly avoiding artificial flavors, yet Stop & Shop allegedly misleads shoppers by implying that its products derive their taste solely from natural ingredients.
Lovett argues that such deceptive labeling tactics violate New York’s consumer protection laws and cause consumers to pay a premium for products they falsely believe to be healthier. The lawsuit seeks monetary damages, injunctive relief, and a revision of Stop & Shop’s labeling practices.
20. Martinez v. Kraft Heinz Co. et al.
Plaintiff Bryce Martinez filed a class action lawsuit against major food corporations, including Kraft Heinz, Mondelez, Post Holdings, Coca-Cola, PepsiCo, General Mills, Nestlé, and others, alleging that these companies intentionally engineer ultra-processed foods (UPFs) to be addictive. The lawsuit claims that Big Tobacco tactics were repurposed by these food companies in the 1980s to create highly processed, hyper-palatable foods that exploit human neurobiology, leading to an epidemic of obesity, diabetes, and other health issues.
Martinez argues that these companies deliberately manipulate food formulations and marketing strategies to encourage overconsumption, particularly targeting children and minority communities. The lawsuit seeks damages, increased regulatory oversight, and transparency in food labeling.
21. Nimmons v. Weis Markets
Plaintiff Cynthia Nimmons filed a class action lawsuit against Weis Markets Inc., alleging that the supermarket chain misleads consumers about the use of artificial additives in its food products. The complaint states that Weis markets its products as “natural” and “minimally processed”, yet lab testing reveals the presence of synthetic preservatives, emulsifiers, and artificial flavor enhancers.
Nimmons argues that this deceptive labeling violates New York’s consumer protection laws, misleading consumers into believing they are purchasing healthier alternatives. The lawsuit seeks monetary damages and corrective action to prevent further misleading marketing.
22. Pantano v. Goodpop
Plaintiff Joseph Pantano filed a class action lawsuit against GoodPop, Inc., alleging that its “100% Fruit Juice” Freezer Pops contain non-fruit additives, such as malic acid and guar gum. Despite the bold labeling claim, the lawsuit states that these synthetic ingredients contradict the product’s representation as purely fruit-based.
Pantano argues that GoodPop’s deceptive labeling misleads consumers, causing them to pay a premium for what they believe to be an all-natural product. The lawsuit seeks monetary compensation and labeling corrections to prevent further consumer deception.
23. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) v. American Ostrich
PETA filed a class action lawsuit against The American Ostrich Company, alleging that the company falsely advertises its ostrich meat and byproducts as “ethically raised” and “humanely harvested”. The lawsuit claims that multiple whistleblower reports from former employees contradict these humane claims, exposing conditions where ostriches suffer from neglect, malnutrition, and inhumane slaughter practices.
PETA argues that these misleading claims exploit consumers who are willing to pay a premium for ethically sourced animal products. The lawsuit seeks injunctive relief, consumer refunds, and stricter oversight of animal welfare claims in food marketing.
24. Polito v. Walmart
Plaintiff Robert Polito filed a class action lawsuit against Walmart Inc., alleging that certain Walmart-branded food products falsely claim to be “naturally flavored” while actually containing synthetic additives. The lawsuit highlights growing consumer opposition to artificial flavors, with many people willing to pay more for products they believe are free from lab-made ingredients.
Polito argues that Walmart’s misleading marketing causes financial harm to consumers and violates New York’s food labeling laws. The lawsuit seeks damages, an injunction, and corrective advertising.
25. Roffman v. Rebbl
Plaintiff Mehva Roffman filed a class action lawsuit against Rebbl, Inc., alleging that the company misleads consumers by claiming its protein shakes contain “16g protein” without accounting for digestibility and bioavailability. The lawsuit states that FDA regulations require companies to disclose the Protein Digestibility Corrected Amino Acid Score (PDCAAS) when making protein claims, yet Rebbl fails to do so.
Roffman argues that Rebbl’s failure to comply with FDA protein labeling requirements misleads consumers into believing they are getting more usable protein than they actually are. The lawsuit seeks damages, regulatory enforcement, and revised labeling to include accurate protein calculations.
26. Schavrien v. Abbott Laboratories
Plaintiffs Ryan Schavrien and Max Ulrich filed a class action lawsuit against Abbott Laboratories, alleging false advertising of its Similac Go & Grow and PediaSure Grow & Gain toddler formulas. The lawsuit claims that Abbott markets these products as providing “Complete, Balanced Nutrition”, yet they contain high levels of added sugar, corn syrup, and processed oils, making them nutritionally inferior.
Schavrien argues that Abbott’s advertising is misleading and exploits parents’ concerns about child nutrition, causing them to pay a premium for products that may actually contribute to poor dietary habits. The lawsuit seeks damages, stricter labeling laws, and consumer refunds.
27. Sullivan v. Hershey
Plaintiff James Sullivan filed a class action lawsuit against The Hershey Company, alleging misleading marketing and labeling of its chocolate products. The lawsuit claims that Hershey fails to disclose the presence of lead and cadmium in some of its popular chocolate products, posing potential health risks to consumers.
Sullivan argues that Hershey knowingly concealed these heavy metal contaminants while marketing the chocolates as high-quality and safe for consumption. The lawsuit seeks damages, consumer refunds, and stricter testing and labeling requirements to ensure accurate disclosure of harmful substances.
28. Wilson et al. v. Smartfoods
Plaintiffs Rajeeyah Wilson, Stalin Javier Eusebio, and Nancy L. Patnude filed a class action lawsuit against Smartfoods, Inc. and PepsiCo, Inc., alleging false advertising of Smartfood popcorn products. The lawsuit claims that Smartfoods labels its White Cheddar and Movie Theater Butter popcorn as having ‘No Artificial Flavors’ and ‘No Artificial Preservatives’, yet the products contain maltodextrin, a highly processed ingredient that functions as both a flavor enhancer and preservative.
The plaintiffs argue that this deceptive marketing led consumers to pay a premium, believing they were purchasing a more natural, additive-free product. The lawsuit seeks damages, restitution, and an injunction to prevent further false advertising.
