Food companies have several significant defenses to consumer fraud class actions over product labeling, say attorneys Joshua Briones and Crystal Lopez, and analyst Grace Rosales. The authors focus on damages, an area in which plaintiffs have ‘‘struggled to persuade courts that their proposed damages models are a reliable method of calculating class wide damages.’’

Consumers want ‘‘natural’’, ‘‘healthy’’ and ‘‘organic’’ products and labels that identify them accurately. Unfortunately, enterprising attorneys are more frequently filing baseless, lawyer-driven strike suits alleging accurate labels are somehow false and misleading. The trend began with class actions challenging products labeled as ‘‘natural,’’ but other advertising claims are increasingly being challenged. Complaints have been filed with respect to the use of the phrase ‘‘evaporated cane juice’’ instead of sugar, labeling of trans fats, claims that products were ‘‘imported from’’ or ‘‘made in’’ certain locations, and whether products were ‘‘handmade.’’ Products as diverse as tea, guacamole and almond milk have been the subject of litigation. The Northern District of California, once dubbed the Food Court, is no longer alone. Cases are filed in both federal and state courts across the country. Often, the filing of one lawsuit prompts copycat lawsuits in other jurisdictions.

Originally published in Product Safety & Liability Reporter on January 2, 2017.