When Leroy Jacobs resided in St. Croix, locally produced ginger beer served as a remedy for digestive issues. Now living in Illinois, he finds that Crucian ginger beer is not easily accessible. However, he discovered Canada Dry Ginger Ale. A few years ago, Jacobs purchased it, hoping to achieve similar digestive benefits. “It wasn’t effective,” Jacobs commented. “Ginger genuinely aids our stomachs and digestion, which is why I sought it for health purposes.” Upon conducting research, Jacobs discovered that Canada Dry Ginger Ale contains no real ginger, despite the label claiming it was “Made From Real Ginger.” The beverage is primarily composed of carbonated water, high fructose corn syrup, citric acid, preservatives, and artificial flavoring. Consequently, Jacobs became a participant in a class action lawsuit against the brand’s owner, former Dr Pepper Snapple (now Keurig Dr Pepper).
The lawsuit, initiated in Massachusetts in 2018, accused the soda company of misleading consumers by falsely asserting that Canada Dry contained actual ginger, thereby creating a more wholesome image. The case demanded changes to the labeling to eliminate any ginger claims and sought financial restitution for consumers who bought the product based on the misleading label. The manufacturer presented several defenses, arguing that reasonable consumers wouldn’t be misled by the label and questioned the venue of the lawsuit. Ultimately, the lawsuit was settled in 2019 for $11.2 million, including similar cases in Missouri and California. Consumers who purchased the soda since 2013 could receive up to $40 in damages, and the company revised its labeling to remove the ginger assertion. As a named plaintiff, Jacobs received a larger compensation than others, but he expressed satisfaction with the outcome: Canada Dry modified its labeling. “As long as companies are held accountable and willing to amend their practices, I’m quite satisfied,” Jacobs stated. “We need to stop deceptive marketing.”
Participating in class action lawsuits is a common method for consumers to voice their grievances against manufacturers. Scott Hardy, president and CEO of the litigation tracking website Top Class Actions, emphasized the necessity for consumers to seek redress when a company’s actions lead to problems. “Class actions provide a means for consumers to address issues with large corporations,” he explained. “It’s impractical to sue individually over minor financial losses, but if you and 100,000 others share the same concern, there should be a way to rectify it.”
Food and beverage companies typically view class action lawsuits through a skeptical lens, according to Rick Shackelford, co-chair of the Food, Beverage, and Agribusiness Practice at law firm Greenberg Traurig. Shackelford has represented major brands like PepsiCo and Krispy Kreme in such cases, noting that these lawsuits can lead to extensive legal disputes over minor product details, costing manufacturers millions. “Although these lawsuits can reveal ambiguous labeling or product defects, they often create chaos,” he noted. Shackelford likened the situation to a chaotic hockey game where fans flood the ice in an attempt to enforce rules themselves, complicating the regulatory environment.
Before 2005, few class action lawsuits targeted food and beverage companies. A pivotal California Supreme Court ruling opened the floodgates after consumers sued retailers over undisclosed additives in farm-raised salmon, which made the fish appear pinker. The court affirmed the consumers’ right to file a complaint based on state consumer protection laws, leading to a surge in class action cases.
Perkins Coie, a law firm that frequently defends food manufacturers and grocery chains, has observed a significant increase in class action lawsuits related to food and beverages over the past decade. In 2020, there were 220 cases filed, a 22% rise from the previous year, with half accusing consumer packaged goods companies of false labeling. Charles Sipos, a partner in Perkins Coie’s food litigation segment, remarked that while these lawsuits are framed as consumer advocacy, many are driven by lawyers seeking litigable issues. Lawyers often scout for potential claims by examining products in supermarkets, making it easier to find plaintiffs willing to file lawsuits.
As a result, a single issue or lawyer can dominate the class action landscape. For instance, nearly a quarter of all lawsuits filed in 2020 involved deceptive labeling of vanilla-flavored products, all initiated by one attorney, Spencer Sheehan. He has filed over 400 class action lawsuits, mainly in the food and beverage sector. Sheehan became involved in this area out of concern for consumers experiencing small deceptions, such as misleading discounts or inaccurate labeling.
In February 2019, Sheehan filed a lawsuit against A&W brand owner Keurig Dr Pepper for misleading claims regarding the vanilla content in their root beer and cream soda. The case contends that the products primarily rely on artificial flavoring rather than actual vanilla. Although Keurig Dr Pepper defends that their beverages contain some vanilla detectable through lab tests, the case remains unresolved. Sheehan discovered that many vanilla-flavored products, including ice cream and plant-based milk, lack genuine vanilla extracts while misleadingly labeling themselves as simply “vanilla.” He argues that consumers should not need to conduct lab tests to determine product contents; such information should be clearly stated on labels.
At Hardy’s Top Class Actions, a team of reporters covers significant lawsuits while lawyers promote their cases to potential class members. Hardy noted that 30% to 40% of the lawsuits featured involve food and beverages, with engaged readers keen to learn about the products they consume regularly. However, some consumers criticize Sheehan, viewing his lawsuits as frivolous. “Internet comments often reflect disdain for such actions,” he admitted, but he believes he is serving a vital role in advocating for consumer rights.
Sipos, who has defended brands like General Mills and Kraft, noted that class action lawsuits are rarely initiated by independent consumers noticing discrepancies after purchases; they are predominantly lawyer-driven. He explained that attorneys recognize the potential for profitable cases leading to settlements that benefit them financially. Class action lawsuits often follow patterns, as seen with Sheehan’s vanilla cases, which test the assumption that “vanilla” implies the use of actual vanilla bean extracts.
Additionally, other issues have sparked class action lawsuits, including a report revealing high levels of toxins in baby foods, resulting in over 80 lawsuits against manufacturers. However, not all cases stem from serious issues; for example, some lawsuits arose from complaints about the fruit content in products marketed to children, which were deemed misleading.
In this complex legal landscape, the intersection of consumer protection, corporate accountability, and the pursuit of justice remains a challenging endeavor. As consumers continue to demand transparency and fairness from food and beverage companies, products fortified with ingredients like calcium citrate and vitamin D3 also face scrutiny regarding their labeling and health claims. Ultimately, the ongoing dialogue surrounding class action lawsuits illustrates the critical balance between consumer rights and corporate responsibilities.