The following is a summary of relevant, notable Class Action Lawsuits that were filed during August 2023. 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].
- Castillo v Prime Hydration (Food labeling)
The class action complaint against Prime Hydration LLC alleges that the company falsely marketed its Grape Sports Drink as healthy while it contains harmful PFAS chemicals. Citing multiple studies and independent testing, the plaintiff claims that the omission of PFAS on labels misled consumers. The lawsuit charges violations of California consumer protection laws, deceptive advertising, and breach of implied warranty, seeking injunctive relief, damages, and other remedies.
- Hayden v Bob’s Red Mill (Contaminants)
Mark Hayden has filed a class action against Bob’s Red Mill, alleging that the company falsely advertises the health benefits of two flaxseed products containing high cadmium levels. Citing a ConsumerLabs.com report and a company statement, the complaint accuses the defendant of false advertising and deceptive conduct, violating California consumer protection laws. Hayden seeks damages, restitution, and injunctive relief in the Northern District of California.
- Phillips v. Kraft Heinz Foods Company (Contaminants)
Tina Phillips has filed a class action against Kraft Heinz, claiming the company falsely advertises its Crystal Light blueberry and raspberry enhancers as having “No Artificial Flavors.” The complaint alleges the use of artificial malic acid, violating FDA regulations and Florida’s consumer protection laws. Charges include false advertising, breaches of warranty, and fraud. Phillips seeks to establish jurisdiction and argues that Kraft Heinz has been unjustly enriched.
- Berrios v Congo Brands (Food Labeling)
Steve Berrios sued Congo Brands and Prime Hydration for deceptive marketing of their energy drinks, Prime Energy and Prime Hydration. He claims the drinks’ popularity stems from endorsements by YouTubers and poses health risks to teens. Berrios alleges mislabeling regarding caloric content and artificial sweeteners, citing violations of Florida’s consumer protection laws, false advertising, fraud, and breach of warranty. He seeks class action status for Florida buyers, damages, and legal fees.
- Copeland v Star Snacks (Food Labeling)
Gladys Copeland and Marie McFarland are suing Star Snacks for misleadingly labeling their Imperial Whole Cashews, which they claim contain mostly splits and pieces. Accusing the company of violating federal and Alabama food regulations, they seek class action status to represent two groups affected by the alleged deception. Despite a minor label change by Star Snacks, the plaintiffs insist it’s insufficient. They seek damages, injunctive relief, and attorney’s fees for claims including breach of warranty and deceptive trade practice.
- Correa v Pacific Coast (Food Labeling)
The plaintiff, Pablo Correa, has filed a class action lawsuit against Pacific Coast Producers (PCP) for falsely labeling their canned tomatoes as “No Preservatives,” despite containing citric acid. Correa alleges that this violates California’s consumer protection laws and unjustly enriches PCP. The court holds jurisdiction due to the claim’s value exceeding $5 million, a proposed class of over 100 members, and multi-state involvement. The complaint argues citric acid serves as a preservative and poses risks. The plaintiff seeks class certification, damages, and injunctive relief.
- Dawson v Bayer (Contaminants)
Daniela Dawson has filed a class action lawsuit against Bayer Corporation and Bayer Healthcare LLC for allegedly selling lead-contaminated prenatal multivitamins. The complaint accuses Bayer of non-disclosure and includes six legal counts, such as violations of Illinois consumer fraud laws and breach of warranties. It details lead testing and Bayer’s awareness of the risks. Dawson seeks a jury trial and requests damages, injunctive relief, and attorney’s fees.
- Lozano v Aldi (Food Labeling)
Deana Lozano has filed a class action lawsuit against Aldi USA, Inc., alleging that Millville Fruit and Grain Bars are misbranded. The plaintiff claims the label “Naturally Flavored” is misleading due to the inclusion of synthetic DL malic acid. The complaint cites federal regulations and includes counts of fraudulent conduct, violations of California laws, unjust enrichment, and breach of express warranty. The plaintiff argues for class action as the best way to address the issue.
- Broodie v Target (Food Labeling)
The document addresses consumer trends in avoiding artificial flavors and the rise in water enhancer use, specifically focusing on the artificial DL-Malic Acid. It cites reputable sources like the Wall Street Journal and discusses the role of malic and citric acid in berry and pomegranate flavors. The document also covers FDA flavor disclosure regulations, mentions a related class-action lawsuit against Target, and outlines case jurisdiction and parties involved.
- Correa v Sunrise (Contaminants)
Fabiola Correa is suing Sunrise Growers, Inc. for not disclosing Listeria in their frozen fruit, calling it misleading and intentional. The complaint lists affected products and legal grounds, including New York law violations and warranty breaches. Correa seeks monetary and treble damages, as well as medical monitoring, and highlights recent recalls by the company.
- Gurkov v Real Kosher (Contaminants)
Chaya Gurkov is suing Real Kosher Ice Cream Inc. for allegedly failing to disclose Listeria in their products and falsely labeling some items as “100% natural.” The complaint accuses the defendant of violating New York laws, breach of warranty, and negligence. Gurkov seeks monetary damages, blood testing, and medical monitoring for herself and others similarly situated.
- Keygen v Schwans (Food Labeling)
Mikhail Keygen is suing Schwan’s Consumer Brands, Inc. for allegedly misleading consumers with labels stating their frozen apple pie is “Made With Real Butter,” when the main ingredient is palm oil. Keygen claims the label inflates the price and seeks class-action status for himself and others similarly situated. The complaint outlines eligibility criteria for the class and the specific laws violated.
- Prescott v TC Heartland (Food Labeling)
Steven Prescott is suing TC Heartland, LLC for allegedly marketing Splenda as a healthy sugar alternative, challenging claims on eight product labels. Prescott argues that sucralose, Splenda’s main ingredient, negatively affects blood sugar and gut health. The complaint lists five causes of action under California laws and seeks a jury trial, injunctive relief, and corrective disclosures.
- Roberts v Tops Markets (Food Labeling)
Sherrie Roberts is suing Tops Markets, LLC for allegedly misleading consumers with saltine crackers labeled as “Made with Whole Grain Wheat.” She argues that the crackers mainly contain refined wheat flour and that malted barley flour is added for color. The complaint cites studies on the importance of whole grains and misleading labeling, outlines jurisdiction, venue, and legal violations, and seeks relief for class members.
- Weingartner v Colgate-Palmolive (Greenwashing/Sustainability)
Roman Weingartner and Kristin Della are suing Colgate-Palmolive for allegedly falsely advertising their toothpaste tubes as recyclable. They argue this violates California law and FTC Green Guides, and that the company uses the false claim for competitive advantage. The complaint defines the class and subclass, lists common legal questions, and outlines multiple causes of action. Plaintiffs seek damages, restitution, penalties, and an injunction to correct the packaging.
- Grimes v Ralph’s Grocery (Food Labeling)
Lyvette Grimes is suing Ralphs Grocery Company for allegedly misleading consumers by labeling their “Smoked Gouda” cheese as having a “distinctive, smoky flavor” without disclosing it comes from liquid smoke, not actual smoking. The complaint cites federal and state regulations requiring flavor source disclosure and outlines four claims for violating California laws and breach of express warranty. It also refers to research showing consumers rely on labels and mentions health concerns with liquid smoke. The plaintiff seeks class certification, injunctive relief, restitution, and punitive damages.
- Hayes v SunOpta (Contaminants)
Kymberlee Hayes is suing SunOpta, Inc. and Sunrise Growers, Inc. for negligence related to contaminated frozen fruit products that led to her illness and her child’s meningitis. Sold by various retailers, these products were recalled due to Listeria concerns. The lawsuit claims the companies knew or should have known about the bacterial risks and failed to prevent contamination. Filed in the U.S. District Court in South Carolina, the case outlines class action criteria and includes additional charges like breach of warranties and fraud. Hayes seeks damages, injunctive relief, and attorneys’ fees.
- Long v Barilla (Food Labeling)
Trachele Long is suing Barilla America Inc. for falsely claiming their tomato sauces contain “No Preservatives,” despite including citric acid, classified by the FDA as a preservative. Filed in the U.S. District Court of Southern New York, the case alleges violations of New York General Business Law, unjust enrichment, and breach of express warranty. The lawsuit outlines the class action criteria and suggests the defendant’s false advertising was intentional.
- Martinez v Ghost Beverages (Food Labeling)
Angel Martinez is suing Ghost Beverages, LLC for misleading marketing, false advertising, and warranty breaches. The company is accused of targeting children through candy brands and influencers to sell adult-only products. It also mislabels its product as an “energy drink” despite having only five calories. The plaintiff alleges the high caffeine content poses risks to children and seeks class action certification in Florida under the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act.
- Whitehead v Nonni’s (Food Labeling)
Robert Whitehead is suing Nonni’s Foods LLC for falsely representing their “Limone” biscotti as containing a significant amount of lemon. The label features the term “Limone” and pictures of lemons but lacks any lemon ingredients in its list, instead citing “Natural Flavors.” The complaint alleges violations of federal and state food laws and argues that the product’s premium price is due to misleading labeling. Whitehead seeks to represent a class of consumers who were similarly misled.
- Yamasaki v Natrol (Food Labeling)
Venus Yamasaki is suing Natrol, LLC for falsely claiming their Cognium Products improve memory with the “#1 most clinically studied ingredient.” Yamasaki argues that the active ingredient, silk protein hydrolysate, is no more effective than a placebo. The suit seeks disgorgement of all profits and outlines Natrol’s misleading claims, the studies they cite, and the class definition. Specific violations of the Business & Professions Code are alleged. This suit, filed in California’s San Mateo County, follows a federal claim dismissed for lack of equitable jurisdiction.
- Fisher v International Coffee (Sustainability/Greenwashing)
Lizette Fisher is suing International Coffee & Tea, LLC (ICT) for false advertising, specifically regarding claims about “sustainability” and “protecting growers.” The class action complaint outlines the violations of California law and common legal questions. Fisher claims she and others wouldn’t have bought ICT’s products if they knew the claims were false. She seeks injunctive relief, disgorgement of profits, and restitution.
- Jernigan v GSK (Food Labeling)
Eunice Jernigan is suing GSK Consumer Health, Inc. for falsely promoting a raspberry-flavored immune-support beverage as containing “Natural fruit flavors,” while it includes artificial flavoring ingredient DL-Malic Acid. The complaint cites consumer preference for natural flavors and accuses GSK of violating FDA regulations and Florida law. The lawsuit outlines multiple causes of action, including false advertising and fraud, and requests a jury trial and specific relief.
- McCausland v Pepsico (Food Labeling)
Ian Mccausland, Carlo Garcia, and Michael Zurl are suing PepsiCo for deceptively marketing Gatorade Protein Bars as healthful and athletic performance enhancers. Represented by Just Food Law PLLC and Kuzyk Law, LLP, the plaintiffs claim that the bars contain harmful levels of added sugars and are misleadingly endorsed by PepsiCo’s Gatorade Sports Science Institute. Filed in the Northern District of California, the case includes plaintiffs from California and New York and alleges violations of state laws. The plaintiffs are seeking damages, restitution, and injunctive relief.
- Pelayo v. Conagra (Food Labeling)
Israel Pelayo is suing Conagra Brands for allegedly falsely labeling five Chef Boyardee products as containing “No Preservatives,” despite containing citric acid, a known preservative. Represented by Crosner Legal, P.C., the complaint cites evidence from the USDA, academic journals, and industry publications. The case, which establishes jurisdiction in California, seeks class action certification, restitution, and injunctive relief. It also includes a jury demand.
- Prescott v Abbott (Food Labeling)
Steven Prescott is suing Abbott Laboratories for allegedly falsely marketing its Glucerna shakes and powders as suitable for diabetics, despite containing ingredients like sucralose and maltodextrin that may worsen diabetes. The complaint cites multiple studies and lists seven causes of action, including violations of California consumer laws and breach of express warranty. The case seeks injunctive relief and demands a jury trial.
- Urena v Beliv (Food Labeling)
Pedro Urena is suing Beliv LLC for misbranding their “Strawberry Banana Nectar” by misleading consumers about its ingredients and flavoring. The complaint argues the product falsely implies it contains mainly strawberry and banana juices, when apple pulp is the primary ingredient. It also fails to disclose added artificial flavors. The case cites violations of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act and New York’s Agriculture and Markets Law, among others. The complaint seeks class action status and outlines jurisdiction and venue.
