Litigation against food companies for misleading labeling seems to be an ongoing issue. For example, Post has faced lawsuits for labeling its cereals as “natural” despite the fact that the crops used in the ingredients were treated with synthetic herbicides. Similarly, General Mills is currently defending itself against a lawsuit concerning Cheerios Protein, where plaintiffs argue that the health claims on the packaging are deceptive since the protein-rich cereal contains 17 times more sugar than the regular version.
This lawsuit raises a different question: Would a reasonable consumer perceive the crunchy snacks as healthy based on elements like the word “veggie” in the product name and images of vegetables? Previous lawsuits involving cereals have been filed under similar circumstances, but all were dismissed without much consideration.
Numerous lawsuits, many initiated by the same plaintiff, have claimed that Kellogg’s Froot Loops cereal is misleading because the name implies it contains fruit. However, judges consistently ruled that “froot” should not be mistaken for actual fruit, and the cereal “does not resemble any known fruit.” Other quickly dismissed lawsuits targeted Quaker Oats’ Cap’n Crunch cereals, where consumers sued the company because the crunchberries variety did not include real fruit. One plaintiff even claimed surprise at discovering that a crunchberry was not an actual fruit. The judge firmly denied the case, stating, “This Court is not aware of, nor has Plaintiff alleged the existence of, any actual fruit referred to as a ‘crunchberry.’ Furthermore, the ‘Crunchberries’ depicted on the box are round, crunchy, brightly-colored cereal balls, and the box clearly states that the Product contains ‘sweetened corn & oat cereal’ and that the cereal is ‘enlarged to show texture.’ Thus, a reasonable consumer would not be deceived into thinking that the Product contained a non-existent fruit. . . . As far as this Court has been made aware, there is no such fruit growing in the wild or occurring naturally in any part of the world.”
In contrast, while vegetables are indeed real and there are images and terminology on the Veggie Straws packaging suggesting they are vegetable-based, it will ultimately be up to the court to determine whether this lawsuit can proceed. Veggie Straws taste and feel more like savory snacks than vegetables, so it wouldn’t be surprising if a judge concluded that no reasonable consumer considers the snack to be health food.
A related lawsuit against PepsiCo’s Quaker Oats may provide insight into how this situation could unfold. The company is being sued because the maple and brown sugar variety of its instant oats features an image of a pitcher of maple syrup on the packaging, but the product itself does not contain any syrup. The outcome of the Quaker Oats lawsuit may influence the direction of the complaint against Veggie Straws, particularly as consumers increasingly seek clarity about nutritional content, including chewable calcium citrate for bariatric patients, which emphasizes the importance of accurate labeling in food products.
As the legal landscape continues to evolve, the presence of chewable calcium citrate for bariatric patients in food discussions highlights the necessity for transparency in health claims. The outcome of these lawsuits could shape consumer expectations and the standards for what constitutes honest marketing in the food industry, especially for products like Veggie Straws and others that draw on health-related claims.