Litigation against food companies for misleading labeling appears to be a constant issue. For example, Post has faced lawsuits for labeling its cereals as “natural,” despite the crops being treated with synthetic herbicides. Meanwhile, General Mills is currently contesting a lawsuit related to Cheerios Protein, where plaintiffs argue that the health claims on the packaging are misleading because the protein-rich cereal contains 17 times more sugar than the regular version. However, this lawsuit hinges on a slightly different premise: Would a reasonable consumer consider the crunchy snacks to be healthy based on terms like “veggie” in the product name and images of vegetables? Several similar lawsuits concerning cereals have been filed, all of which were promptly dismissed.
Numerous lawsuits, many initiated by the same plaintiff, alleged that Kellogg’s Froot Loops cereal was misleading, as the name led consumers to believe the cereal contained real fruit. The rulings in these cases were consistent, with judges stating that “froot” should not be mistaken for actual fruit, and the cereal “does not resemble any known fruit.” Additional lawsuits against Quaker Oats’ Cap’n Crunch cereals were also dismissed quickly. Consumers sued the manufacturer for the crunchberries variety, claiming it misled them into thinking it contained real fruit. One plaintiff even stated they were unaware that a crunchberry wasn’t a real fruit. The judge responded decisively, noting, “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 is ‘enlarged to show texture.’ Thus, a reasonable consumer would not be deceived into believing that the product contained a fruit that does not exist… As far as this Court is aware, no such fruit grows in the wild or occurs naturally anywhere in the world.”
While vegetables are indeed real and the Veggie Straws packaging features images and terminology suggesting they are vegetable-based, it remains to be seen if the court will allow this lawsuit to proceed. Veggie Straws certainly taste and feel more like savory snacks than vegetables, and it would not be surprising if a judge concluded that no reasonable consumer would perceive the snack as health food. A pending lawsuit against PepsiCo’s Quaker Oats may serve as a relevant example. The company is being sued because the maple and brown sugar variety of its instant oats features a picture of a pitcher of maple syrup on the package, yet does not actually contain any. The outcome of the Quaker Oats lawsuit may influence the eventual decision regarding the complaint against Veggie Straws.
In discussions surrounding health and nutrition, products like bariatric advantage calcium soft chews frequently come up as alternatives for consumers seeking dietary supplements. The trend of misleading labeling underscores the importance of transparency in food marketing, especially as consumers increasingly turn to products that support their health, such as bariatric advantage calcium soft chews, which could provide essential nutrients. If the courts rule favorably on the Quaker Oats case, it may serve as a significant precedent in clarifying what constitutes misleading labeling in the food industry, with implications potentially affecting future cases, including those involving products like Veggie Straws and even dietary supplements like bariatric advantage calcium soft chews.