Time is money, and when you’re hungry for mac-and-cheese, a few seconds can be worth millions of dollars. Or at least that’s what a Florida woman suggests in her class action lawsuit against Kraft Heinz over a claim on single-serve cups of Velveeta Shells & Cheese stating that the product can be “ready in 3
Advertising Litigation
Coca-Cola Scores Second Win over Green Claims in One Month
This month, the DC Superior Court dismissed a lawsuit brought by Earth Island Institute against Coca-Cola, alleging that the company falsely represents itself as “a sustainable and environmentally friendly company, despite being one of the largest contributors of plastic pollution in the world.” The court held that many of the challenged statements are aspirational and…
Coca-Cola Beats False Advertising Suit Over Aspirational Claims
Last year, we posted about Earth Island Institute’s lawsuit against Coca-Cola, alleging that the company falsely represents itself as “a sustainable and environmentally friendly company, despite being one of the largest contributors of plastic pollution in the world.” While many lawsuits involving green claims focus on claims about past or present results (which can usually…
Man Sues Bass Pro Over Lifetime Guarantee on Socks
As heat waves spread across the country, many men are looking for opportunities to go without socks. (To those men, I might suggest a good pair of no-show socks but, like with other grooming tips, that’s beyond the scope of this post.) The point is that, despite the heat, one Missouri man wants more…
YouTube Faces Suit Over Automatic Renewal Practices
Last month, plaintiffs filed a class action lawsuit against YouTube (and its parent company Google), alleging that the company violates Oregon laws by automatically renewing paid subscriptions to premium music, television, and video streaming services without adequately disclosing the offer terms or getting consent.
Specifically, the complaint alleges that the company violated Oregon’s automatic renewal…
Food + Personal Care Litigation and Regulatory Highlights – January 2022
Welcome to our 2022 inaugural issue of Food and Personal Care Litigation and Regulatory Highlights, where we explore trends and developments from around these industries. It’s fair to say that the year has started off very busy in both the courtroom and the regulatory arena. On this chilly winter day, our first stop is in California.
Prop 65
Our friends at Kelley Green Law Blog get the starting position for this issue by highlighting a precipitous uptick in the number of Prop 65 filings over the prior year. While the Covid-19 pandemic caused all sorts of disruptions to society and the economy, at least one area of business has thrived over the last two years: private plaintiff enforcement of California Proposition 65. In 2020-2021, over 40% more Prop 65 actions were brought by private plaintiff “bounty hunters” than in the two years prior to the pandemic (2018-2019). Compared to a decade ago, private plaintiff groups now initiate three times more Prop 65 actions each year, and five times more than in 2008. Learn more here about the most frequently cited chemicals and those that are emerging, including PFAS.
Continue Reading Food + Personal Care Litigation and Regulatory Highlights – January 2022
Noom to Pay Over $60M to Cancel Automatic Renewal Suit
In several recent posts and a webinar, we’ve talked about how the FTC and state AGs are focusing on automatic renewals. A series of new laws and investigations show that this continues to be a hot topic for both lawmakers and regulators. But a new settlement involving Noom’s automatic renewal practices for its weight…
The Pink Tax: A Litigation and Legislation Update
We previously reported on an emerging legislative and litigation trend relating to the “pink tax” – a gender-based pricing phenomenon that allegedly results in higher prices for goods and services marketed towards women as compared to substantially similar alternatives marketed towards men. As predicted, the last two years have shown an uptick in litigation (which has been largely unsuccessful) and legislative action (some finalized and some pending).
Litigation
Last year, we discussed an early blow to the pink tax theory of liability in Schulte v. Conopco, d/b/a Unilever, et al. In Schulte, the plaintiffs alleged that various personal care manufacturers and retailers violated the Missouri Merchandizing Practices Act (MMPA) by charging more for deodorants marketed for women than allegedly similar deodorants marketed for men. The product lines at issue contained similar, but not identical, ingredients, came in different sizes, and were available in different scents (fifteen “feminine” scents in the line marketed for women and five “masculine” scents in the line marketed for men). The Eastern District of Missouri dismissed the complaint, ruling that “Missouri law does not compel identical products to be sold at the same price” and that the plaintiff’s remedy “lies with legislation, not litigation.” The Eighth Circuit affirmed on the grounds that the plaintiff mistook “gender-based marketing for gender discrimination.” In order to state a claim, the court ruled that the plaintiff would have to allege that the only difference between the products was the price and the intended target of the marketing. Here, because the plaintiff conceded that the products were, in fact, different, thus dismissal was appropriate.
Continue Reading The Pink Tax: A Litigation and Legislation Update
StubHub Agrees to Pay $9.5 Million to End Refund Investigation
Last year, we posted about how some companies had retroactively changed their refund policies after COVID-19 hit, and we noted some of the potential pitfalls associated with that strategy. Lawsuits and regulatory investigations soon followed, and many have been working their way through the system. This week, ten states and DC announced that StubHub had…
Allbirds Faces Lawsuit Over Green Claims
This summer, a plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit against Allbirds, alleging (among other things) that the company’s environmental claims – including claims about its “sustainable” practices, the “low carbon footprint” of its shoes, and its other “environmentally friendly” initiatives – are false and misleading.
The complaint – which is based largely on a PETA…