The following is a summary of relevant, notable Class Action Lawsuits that were filed in July 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. Augustine v. LesserEvil
Plaintiff Elise Augustine filed a class action lawsuit against LesserEvil LLC in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, alleging that the company’s Lil’ Puffs Kids Snacks contain lead without proper disclosure. The complaint states that lead is a toxic metal harmful to both children and adults, with no known safe exposure level. Independent laboratory testing allegedly found lead levels in the products that exceed California’s maximum allowable daily dose limit. The lawsuit claims that consumers were misled into believing the snacks were safe, as the product labeling did not warn about the presence of lead.
The complaint asserts multiple legal claims, including violations of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act, the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, and breaches of express and implied warranties. Plaintiff argues that LesserEvil knew or should have known about the risks but failed to inform consumers. The lawsuit seeks class certification, damages, and injunctive relief to prevent LesserEvil from continuing to sell the allegedly contaminated products.
2. Basile v. General Mills
Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against General Mills in a class action matter, alleging that the company misrepresented its food products by marketing them as safe and healthy despite containing harmful contaminants. The complaint highlights that independent laboratory testing detected dangerous substances in the defendant’s products, contradicting the brand’s image of offering wholesome food options. The plaintiff claims that General Mills failed to disclose these risks to consumers, violating consumer protection laws.
The plaintiff brings claims under various consumer protection statutes, including breaches of express and implied warranties, fraud, and violations of deceptive trade practices acts. The lawsuit seeks monetary damages, restitution, and corrective advertising to inform consumers about the alleged misrepresentation. The plaintiff argues that had consumers been aware of the contamination, they would not have purchased the products or would have paid less for them.
3. Beras v. Upfield
A class action lawsuit was filed against Upfield, alleging that its plant-based butter and margarine products contain undisclosed harmful contaminants. The complaint asserts that Upfield markets its products as natural and healthy alternatives to dairy butter, misleading consumers into believing they are making a safer choice. The plaintiff cites independent lab testing, which allegedly found the presence of toxic substances in Upfield’s food products.
The lawsuit alleges violations of consumer protection laws, breaches of warranties, and deceptive advertising. The plaintiff argues that Upfield either knew or should have known about the contamination and failed to disclose it. The class action seeks damages, restitution, and an injunction preventing Upfield from continuing misleading marketing practices. The plaintiff also demands corrective advertising and improved quality control measures.
4. Blosser v. Kinder
The plaintiff in this case filed a class action lawsuit against Kinder, alleging that its chocolate products contain harmful levels of contaminants that were not disclosed to consumers. The lawsuit asserts that Kinder has built its brand on being a family-friendly and safe chocolate manufacturer but failed to inform the public of potential health risks associated with its products. The complaint is based on independent testing results that allegedly reveal toxic substances beyond permissible safety limits.
The lawsuit seeks compensation for damages and claims violations of consumer protection laws, breaches of warranties, and fraudulent misrepresentation. The plaintiff alleges that Kinder knowingly misled consumers by marketing its products as safe and suitable for children. The legal action requests injunctive relief to prevent Kinder from continuing its current marketing tactics without full disclosure of the contaminants found in its products.
5. Bowler v. Nestlé
A class action lawsuit was filed against Nestlé, alleging that the company’s food products contain undisclosed harmful contaminants, misleading consumers into believing they are safe for consumption. The plaintiff argues that Nestlé’s marketing materials emphasize quality and safety, but independent testing revealed levels of toxic substances that could pose health risks. The lawsuit claims that consumers purchased these products based on Nestlé’s reputation, unaware of the alleged contamination.
The complaint asserts claims for fraudulent misrepresentation, breaches of warranties, and violations of deceptive trade practices laws. The plaintiff argues that Nestlé either knew or should have known about the risks and failed to disclose them. The lawsuit seeks damages, restitution, and corrective advertising, as well as an injunction to stop the company from making misleading safety claims about its products.
6. Broussard v. Sam’s Club
The plaintiff in this case filed a class action lawsuit against Sam’s Club, alleging that certain food products sold under its private label contain harmful contaminants without proper disclosure. The lawsuit claims that consumers trusted Sam’s Club’s brand reputation for offering high-quality and safe products, but independent testing allegedly found unsafe levels of toxic substances in the food. The plaintiff argues that Sam’s Club engaged in deceptive marketing by failing to disclose these risks.
The legal action asserts violations of consumer protection laws, breaches of warranties, and fraudulent misrepresentation. The lawsuit seeks damages for affected consumers, restitution, and corrective actions to prevent future misleading marketing practices. The plaintiff also requests an injunction requiring Sam’s Club to disclose all potential contaminants in its food products moving forward.
7. Burns v. 7-Eleven
A class action lawsuit was filed against 7-Eleven, alleging that its private-label food products contain harmful contaminants that were not disclosed to consumers. The complaint states that 7-Eleven markets these products as safe and high-quality, but independent testing found toxic substances that could pose health risks. The plaintiff argues that this misleading representation led consumers to purchase products they otherwise would have avoided.
The lawsuit brings claims for breaches of warranties, fraudulent misrepresentation, and violations of consumer protection laws. The plaintiff demands monetary damages, restitution, and corrective advertising. Additionally, the complaint seeks injunctive relief to prevent 7-Eleven from continuing to market its products as safe without disclosing the presence of contaminants.
8. Daniels v. Giant
Plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit against Giant Food Stores, alleging that its store-brand food products contain harmful contaminants, contradicting the company’s marketing claims of safety and quality. The complaint claims that consumers were deceived into purchasing these products under the belief that they met high safety standards, but independent lab tests allegedly found toxic substances in the food.
The legal claims include breaches of warranties, fraudulent misrepresentation, and violations of consumer protection laws. The plaintiff seeks damages, restitution, and corrective advertising, arguing that had consumers been informed about the contaminants, they would not have purchased the products. The lawsuit also requests an injunction to prevent Giant from continuing to misrepresent its food product safety.
9. Delaney v. Eggland’s Best
The plaintiff in this case filed a class action lawsuit against Eggland’s Best, alleging that its eggs contain undisclosed harmful contaminants that contradict the company’s marketing as a premium and healthy choice. The lawsuit asserts that consumers were misled into believing that Eggland’s Best eggs were superior in quality and safety compared to other brands, but independent lab testing allegedly detected toxic substances.
The complaint alleges violations of consumer protection laws, breaches of express and implied warranties, and fraudulent misrepresentation. The lawsuit seeks damages, restitution, and corrective measures, including improved labeling and disclosures. Additionally, the plaintiff requests an injunction to prevent Eggland’s Best from continuing its current advertising practices without full transparency regarding product safety.
10. Delvalle et al v. The Coca-Cola Company
Plaintiffs Juan Delvalle and Kymberlea Durant filed a class action lawsuit against The Coca-Cola Company in the Southern District of New York, alleging deceptive marketing of its Minute Maid Fruit Punch beverages. The lawsuit claims that Coca-Cola falsely labeled the product as having “No Preservatives Added” despite containing citric acid, a known preservative. Plaintiffs argue that consumers purchased the product under the impression that it was free of chemical preservatives, and had they known otherwise, they would not have bought it or would have paid less.
The lawsuit asserts claims under New York General Business Law §§ 349 and 350, breach of express warranty, and unjust enrichment. Plaintiffs seek monetary damages, injunctive relief to prevent Coca-Cola from continuing its allegedly misleading marketing practices, and restitution for affected consumers. The complaint argues that Coca-Cola deliberately misled consumers to increase sales by appealing to health-conscious buyers.
11. Dewitt v. 7-Eleven
Plaintiff Endia Dewitt filed a class action lawsuit against 7-Eleven in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, alleging that the company falsely marketed certain food products as containing only “natural flavors” when they allegedly included artificial flavors. The complaint highlights growing consumer preference for natural ingredients and claims that 7-Eleven misrepresented its product labeling to capitalize on this trend.
The lawsuit argues that 7-Eleven engaged in deceptive marketing practices by failing to clearly disclose artificial additives, in violation of New York’s consumer protection laws. Dewitt seeks damages for affected consumers and demands injunctive relief to stop 7-Eleven from continuing these allegedly deceptive practices. The lawsuit cites historical regulatory efforts to prevent food misbranding and argues that 7-Eleven’s labeling practices misled consumers who trusted the company’s marketing.
12. Garcia v. Herr Foods
Plaintiff Alex Garcia filed a class action lawsuit against Herr Foods in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, alleging that the company misrepresented its Jalapeño Poppers-flavored cheese curls. The lawsuit claims that the product’s packaging, which features images of real jalapeños and melted cheese, misleads consumers into believing it contains actual jalapeño poppers or significant jalapeño ingredients. However, the complaint alleges that the product contains little to no real jalapeño and relies on artificial flavors to mimic the taste.
The lawsuit asserts claims for deceptive advertising, fraud, and violations of consumer protection laws. Garcia seeks monetary damages, restitution, and an injunction requiring Herr Foods to change its labeling to accurately reflect the product’s ingredients. The plaintiff argues that consumers paid a premium for what they believed to be an authentic jalapeño-flavored product but were misled by Herr Foods’ marketing tactics.
13. Gatoff v. Boar’s Head
Plaintiff Sheryl Gatoff filed a class action lawsuit against Boar’s Head Provisions Co., Inc., alleging misleading labeling and deceptive marketing of its ham and other deli meat products. The complaint, filed in the Central District of California, claims that Boar’s Head markets its products as “all-natural” and “uncured” while allegedly including synthetic preservatives and additives.
The lawsuit seeks damages for affected consumers and an injunction to prevent Boar’s Head from continuing its allegedly deceptive advertising practices. The plaintiff argues that the misrepresentation led consumers to believe they were purchasing a higher-quality product than what was actually provided. The complaint details multiple product variations that allegedly do not meet the “all-natural” claims made by Boar’s Head.
14. Gelber v. Blue Diamond
Plaintiff Benjamin Gelber filed a class action lawsuit against Blue Diamond Growers in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, alleging deceptive advertising regarding its “Pecan Nut Thins” crackers. The complaint argues that the product is marketed as being made with real pecans, but pecans are not the primary ingredient, as rice flour is listed first. The lawsuit claims that Blue Diamond misleads consumers by featuring images of whole pecans prominently on the packaging while using only a small amount of pecans in the actual product.
The lawsuit asserts claims for violations of consumer protection laws, false advertising, and misrepresentation. Gelber seeks damages, restitution, and an injunction requiring Blue Diamond to correct its labeling. The plaintiff argues that consumers paid a premium believing the product contained a significant amount of pecans but were instead misled by the marketing.
15. Gollogly v. Mondelez
Plaintiff Tim Gollogly filed a class action lawsuit against Mondelēz International, Inc., alleging that the company misled consumers by falsely representing its “Cocoa Life” program as ensuring sustainable and ethical sourcing of cocoa. The lawsuit claims that despite Mondelēz’s marketing suggesting ethical and sustainable cocoa farming, its supply chain is allegedly linked to child labor and exploitative labor practices in West Africa.
The complaint seeks damages and injunctive relief, arguing that consumers were deceived into purchasing Mondelēz’s cocoa products, including Oreo, Toblerone, and Côte D’Or, under false pretenses. The lawsuit alleges that had consumers known the truth about the supply chain, they would not have purchased the products or would have paid less.
16. Libman v. Hershey
Plaintiff Abraham Libman filed a class action lawsuit against The Hershey Company in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, alleging deceptive marketing practices related to sugar content. The complaint claims that Hershey misleads consumers by downplaying the health risks associated with added sugars in its products while promoting them as healthier options.
The lawsuit argues that Hershey’s labeling and marketing violate consumer protection laws by failing to disclose the true risks of added sugars. The plaintiff seeks damages, restitution, and corrective advertising, arguing that had consumers been fully informed, they would not have purchased the products or would have paid less.
17. Lucas v. Albertsons
Plaintiff Christian Lucas filed a class action lawsuit against Albertsons Companies, Inc., alleging false advertising of its “Signature Select” fruit products. The lawsuit claims that Albertsons misrepresented its fruit cups as containing “100% fruit juice” while actually including synthetic preservatives like citric acid and ascorbic acid.
The lawsuit seeks damages, restitution, and an injunction requiring Albertsons to revise its product labeling. The plaintiff argues that consumers paid a premium for what they believed was an all-natural product but were misled by Albertsons’ deceptive advertising.
18. Moore v. Del Monte
Plaintiff Cameron Moore filed a class action lawsuit against Del Monte Foods, alleging deceptive labeling of its canned pineapple products. The lawsuit claims that Del Monte falsely advertised its pineapple as having “No Preservatives” when it contains citric acid, a known preservative.
The complaint seeks damages, restitution, and an injunction to prevent Del Monte from continuing its allegedly misleading marketing practices. The plaintiff argues that consumers were deceived into paying a premium for a product they believed was free of preservatives.
19. O’Rourke v. Walmart
Plaintiff Kevin O’Rourke filed a class action lawsuit against Walmart, alleging deceptive labeling on its food products. The lawsuit claims that Walmart falsely marketed certain items as containing only “100% natural ingredients” while including artificial additives.
The lawsuit seeks damages, restitution, and an injunction to prevent Walmart from engaging in misleading marketing practices. The plaintiff argues that Walmart’s labeling misled consumers who sought to purchase natural and minimally processed foods.
20. Organic Consumers Association v. Fresh Del Monte
The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) filed a lawsuit against Fresh Del Monte Produce Inc. in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, alleging false and deceptive advertising regarding the sustainability of its avocado products. The lawsuit claims that Del Monte misleads consumers by marketing its avocados as responsibly and sustainably sourced, despite evidence suggesting that their sourcing practices contribute to deforestation, water scarcity, and biodiversity loss in Mexico. OCA argues that Del Monte’s claims about environmental responsibility are inaccurate and that consumers are misled into purchasing these products based on false representations.
The lawsuit does not seek monetary damages but requests declaratory and injunctive relief, aiming to prevent Del Monte from continuing its allegedly misleading advertising practices. OCA contends that consumers are willing to pay a premium for sustainably sourced produce and that Del Monte’s misrepresentations violate consumer trust. The lawsuit highlights the environmental impact of avocado farming in Mexico, where high water consumption and deforestation have led to severe ecological consequences.
21. Organic Consumers Association v. West Pak
Similar to the case against Fresh Del Monte, the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) has filed a lawsuit against West Pak Avocado, Inc. in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. The lawsuit alleges that West Pak falsely markets its avocados as “sustainably and responsibly sourced” when, in reality, their farming practices contribute to deforestation, water shortages, and habitat destruction in Mexico. OCA argues that West Pak’s environmental claims are deceptive and that consumers who prioritize sustainability in their purchasing decisions are misled by these claims.
The lawsuit seeks injunctive and declaratory relief rather than monetary damages, aiming to halt West Pak’s allegedly misleading advertising. OCA asserts that West Pak is capitalizing on consumer demand for environmentally friendly products while failing to adhere to sustainable practices. The complaint also points out the larger industry issue, where avocado production in Mexico has led to significant environmental degradation due to the high demand for the fruit in the U.S..
22. Pitre v. Kevita
Plaintiff Yolanda Pitre filed a class action lawsuit against KeVita Inc. in the Superior Court of California, alleging deceptive marketing related to its “Sparkling Lemonade with Prebiotics” product. The lawsuit claims that KeVita misled consumers by prominently advertising its beverages as beneficial for gut health due to the inclusion of prebiotics. However, the complaint argues that the product contains only three grams of dietary fiber, significantly lower than the scientifically recommended ten grams needed to confer gut health benefits. Additionally, the product contains four grams of added sugar, which, according to the plaintiff, can have negative effects on gut health.
The lawsuit alleges violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law, False Advertising Law, and Consumer Legal Remedies Act. It seeks damages, restitution, and injunctive relief to prevent KeVita from continuing to market its products as gut-health enhancing without adequate scientific support. The complaint also highlights the growing consumer demand for functional beverages and argues that KeVita has taken advantage of this trend with misleading advertising.
23. Ransom v. Mondelez Global LLC
Plaintiff Edna Norment Ransom filed a class action lawsuit against Mondelez Global LLC in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging deceptive marketing of its Nabisco Whole Grain Premium Saltine Crackers. The lawsuit claims that Mondelez misrepresents the crackers as “Whole Grain,” leading consumers to believe that whole grain flour is the predominant ingredient. However, the complaint states that the primary flour used in the product is enriched wheat flour, not whole grain.
The lawsuit asserts claims under New York General Business Law, alleging that Mondelez’s labeling misleads consumers who prioritize whole grains for their health benefits. The plaintiff argues that consumers were overcharged for a product that does not provide the nutritional value they expected. The lawsuit seeks monetary damages, restitution, and corrective labeling to prevent future misrepresentation.
24. Sabath v. Haleon
Plaintiff William Sabath filed a class action lawsuit against Haleon US Inc. in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, alleging deceptive advertising regarding natural flavors in food products. The lawsuit claims that Haleon falsely markets its products as containing only “natural flavors” when they actually include synthetic additives. The complaint highlights growing consumer demand for transparency in food labeling and argues that Haleon capitalized on this trend by misleadingly positioning its products as free from artificial ingredients.
The lawsuit cites violations of New York’s consumer protection laws and seeks monetary damages, injunctive relief, and corrective advertising. The plaintiff argues that had consumers known the true nature of the ingredients, they would not have purchased the product or would have paid less.
25. Schneider v. Del Monte
Plaintiff Angelique Schneider filed a class action lawsuit against Del Monte Foods in the Missouri State Court, alleging deceptive marketing of its “Deluxe Gold Pineapple Slices in 100% Pineapple Juice.” The lawsuit claims that Del Monte falsely advertises the product as containing “No Preservatives” while listing citric acid as an ingredient, which is widely recognized as a preservative.
The lawsuit asserts violations of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act and seeks monetary damages, restitution, and an injunction to prevent Del Monte from continuing this alleged misrepresentation. The plaintiff argues that Del Monte’s misleading labeling caused consumers to believe they were purchasing a preservative-free product, leading to financial harm.
26. Sullivan v. Built Brands
Plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit against Built Brands, alleging deceptive advertising related to its protein bars. The complaint claims that Built Brands markets its bars as containing “real chocolate” when, in reality, the chocolate coating is not made from traditional chocolate ingredients. The lawsuit argues that consumers paid a premium for what they believed to be high-quality chocolate but were misled by the company’s labeling.
The lawsuit alleges violations of consumer protection laws and seeks damages, restitution, and corrective advertising. The plaintiff claims that Built Brands’ deceptive marketing practices led consumers to overpay for a product that did not meet their expectations.
27. Taylor v. Mariani
Plaintiff Tiffany Taylor filed a class action lawsuit against Mariani Packing Co. Inc. in the Supreme Court of New York, alleging deceptive labeling of its Vanilla Yogurt Raisins. The lawsuit claims that the product’s packaging misleads consumers into believing that it contains real vanilla from vanilla beans, when in reality, it contains artificial flavoring.
The complaint alleges violations of consumer protection laws, misrepresentation, and false advertising. The lawsuit seeks damages, restitution, and an injunction preventing Mariani from continuing to market its products with misleading vanilla flavor claims.
28. Torres v. Boar’s Head
Plaintiff Rita J. Torres filed a class action lawsuit against Boar’s Head Provisions Co. Inc. in the Eastern District of New York, alleging deceptive marketing of its deli meat products. The lawsuit claims that Boar’s Head falsely advertises its ham and other meat products as “uncured” and “all-natural” while they contain synthetic preservatives.
The lawsuit seeks monetary damages, restitution, and injunctive relief to stop Boar’s Head from continuing to make misleading claims about its products. The plaintiff argues that consumers paid a premium for these products based on the belief that they were free from artificial preservatives.
