Quantcast

Judge dispenses with class action lawsuit vs Target over 'natural flavor' claims in drink flavoring

COOK COUNTY RECORD

Thursday, November 21, 2024

Judge dispenses with class action lawsuit vs Target over 'natural flavor' claims in drink flavoring

Lawsuits
Target chicago

Target store at Belmont and Clark in Chicago | Eric Fischer, CC BY 2.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0>, via Wikimedia Commons

A federal judge in Rockford has dispensed with a class action lawsuit accusing Target of misleading consumers by selling a fruit drink flavoring that plaintiffs claimed isn't naturally flavored, as the packaging allegedly claims.

U.S. District Judge Iain D. Johnston awarded Target the dismissal in an order handed down on Dec. 30 in the Western Division of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

Attorney Spencer Sheehan, of Great Neck, New York, had filed suit on behalf of plaintiff Jessica Gouwens and potentially many others, alleging Target failed violated the Illinois consumer fraud and consumer protection laws with allegedly deceptive packaging on its Target brand Market Pantry Fruit Punch Water Enhancer. 


Spencer Sheehan of Sheehan & Associates, P.C. | spencersheehan.com

As with similar cases, the lawsuit contends the omission of a key ingredient is key and amounts to intent by Target to mislead consumers.

According to court documents, Gouwens asserts that of particular concern, is the misrepresentation of a primary ingredient, identified as "malic acid." The complaint claims it should have been identified as "dl-malic acid". Gouwens states that because of the concentration of that ingredient, the product is not naturally flavored. 

She claims that she purchased the water enhancer based on its prominent front facing label, which identified the product as containing natural flavors. Gouwens claims she was essentially duped along with others and is now entitled to damages because it was misrepresented, 

She asserted that she and other class members would not have purchased the product or paid the premium price for it "had she known the product contained artificial dl-malic acid instead of natural d-malic acid..."

Judge Johnston pointed out Gouwens plausibly presented that malic acid was artificial dl-malic acid. But he said she needed to do more to proves that a reasonable consumer could be misled. 

Target argued Gouwens needed to establish that Target engaged in actions that could mislead people, specifically omitting any reference to artificial flavor on the front label.

Target continued, and Judge Johnston agreed, that because the label did not state it is "all natural" or free from artificial flavors and because the product is "a bright red, shelf-stable liquid concentrate", a reasonable consumer would not assume otherwise and be deceived or misled. 

Further, while an omission may satisfy the Illinois consumer fraud law as to pleading fraud or deception, this is only plausible when an omission is "employed as a device to mislead." 

In his decision, Judge Johnston felt this was not Target's intent. 

Target was just one among many food and retail giants sued under an accelerating trend of lawsuits claiming misleading or deceptive labeling practices. Sheehan has been at the forefront of this trend, especially in lawsuits filed in Chicago courts. 

Sheehan's work, bringing such lawsuits, has earned accolades and a few nicknames as well like "the Vanilla Vigilante," for the number of lawsuits he has filed against companies over vanilla flavoring. In his own words, Sheehan has stated: "We deal with what most people would think of as relatively minor issues...to compensate (them) for those issues."

According to federal court records, Sheehan has represented plaintiffs in 90 fraud cases in the Northern District of Illinois alone against such food industry companies as Trader Joe's, Costco, Kellogg's, Keebler, and Crisco.

More News