What’s In Your Strawberry Pop-Tart? Kellogg’s Accused of False Advertising
Ludicrous Lawsuits: Could Kellogg’s Be Next Target with Its Strawberry Pop-Tarts?
Our society is no stranger to ludicrous lawsuits and claims for damages. Remember the $5 Million class-action lawsuit against Starbucks® claiming false advertising because the popular chain’s cold drinks contained too much ice such that its 24-ounce beverages contained only 14 ounces of fluid? How about the lawsuit against Subway® seeking $5 Million in damages because not all of the sandwich giant’s footlong sandwiches measured a full twelve inches? Better yet, who recalls the 2014 lawsuit against McDonald’s® for $1.4 Million where a customer received only one napkin with his meal and claimed that the ensuing “charged” confrontation with the store manager left him emotionally distressed and unable to work?
Kellogg’s May Be Subject of Newest Ludicrous Lawsuit
Convenience-food mogul Kellogg’s® faces a new lawsuit that may very well make its way into the annals of “ludicrous suits in history.” An Illinois woman, Anita Harris, has filed suit against Kellogg’s® claiming it engaged in false advertising in connection with its popular Strawberry Pop-Tarts®. Ms. Harris claims she was enticed to purchase Strawberry Pop-Tarts® under the mistaken belief that the product contained more real strawberries—and more nutritious ingredients—than they actually do. According to Ms. Harris, she was distressed to learn that only 2% or less of the product is made from real fruit and the breakfast treat actually contains more pears and apples than strawberries.
Requirements for a Class Action
While Ms. Harris may very well believe her claims—and the resulting distress—she’s fighting an uphill battle to the courthouse. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a), a class action requires four conditions to qualify for class treatment: (i) the class must be so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable, (ii) there must be questions or law or fact common to the class, (iii) the claims of the representative parties must be typical of the claims of the class, and (iv) the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.
Here, in addition to satisfying the other requirements, proving commonality may be difficult. Ms. Harris and her attorneys will be required to demonstrate the same (or common) belief among the members of the class regarding how much actual strawberries each believed was included in Strawberry Pop-Tarts® based on the advertisements.
A Reasonable Consumer and Ludicrous Lawsuits
Courts have rejected other, similar cases on the grounds that no reasonable consumer would be confused. In 2009, Quaker Oats Company was sued on the theory that its Crunch Berries® don’t contain any actual berries. In a blistering dismissal, the judge noted “[t]his Court is not aware of, nor has Plaintiff alleged the existence of, any actual fruit referred to as a ‘crunchberry.’” It’s likely the judge in the Kellogg’s® case will agree that no reasonable consumer would be confused by Kellogg’s® labeling. And the $5 Million claim for damages? Well, that’s a hefty price tag for strawberries.
For more information on litigation, see our IP Litigation and Industry Focused Legal Solutions pages.