Posted December 20, 2013
Two court decisions issued last week in food labeling
class action lawsuits considered the issue of a “reasonable consumer,”
according to the Washington Legal Foundation and published in Forbes here.
In Ang
v. Whitewave Foods Company, plaintiffs claimed consumer fraud against the
maker of soymilk, almond milk, coconut milk, and yogurt products. The plaintiffs “challenged the use of the
term ‘milk’ in the products as well as ingredient references to ‘evaporated
cane juice.’”
Judge Conti of the Northern District of California
ruled that the evaporated cane juice (ECJ) claim was barred by res
judicata. He then found that federal
labeling rules preempted the “milk” labeling claims – federal rules “do not
prescribe how the plant-based beverages must be labeled, and the rules relating
to ‘milk’ only ‘pertain to what milk is, rather than what it is not.” In this situation, federal rules require that
products use the “common or usual name,” which is was the makers of the “Silk”
drinks did.
Judge Conti also found that the claims “fail for the
additional reason that they are simply not plausible” and plaintiff’s ignorance
of the words before the word “milk” “stretches the bounds of credulity.”
In Reilly
v. Amy’s Kitchen, the plaintiff argued that the term “evaporated cane
juice” misled her into buying the company’s products. Judge Cohn of the Southern District of Florida
ruled that he could not decide whether “reasonable consumers were actually
deceived by the use of the term” on a motion to dismiss. Judge Cohn also ruled that the plaintiff did
not have standing to bring claims based on products that she did not actually
purchase.
For more information on food labeling, please visit the
National Agricultural Law Center’s website here.
