This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Consumer Law
False Advertising
Breach of Express Warranties

Evlyn Andrade-Heymsfield, on behalf of herself, all others similarly situated, and the general public v. Nextfoods Inc.

Published: Mar. 29, 2024 | Result Date: Nov. 9, 2023 | Filing Date: Aug. 13, 2021 |

Case number: 3:21-cv-01446-BTM-MSB Settlement –  $1,250,000

Judge

Barry T. Moskowitz

Court

USDC Southern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Jack Fitzgerald
(Fitzgerald Joseph LLP)

Paul K. Joseph
(Fitzgerald Joseph LLP)

Melanie R. Persinger
(Fitzgerald Joseph LLP)

Trevor M. Flynn
(Fitzgerald Joseph LLP)

Caroline S. Emhardt
(Fitzgerald Joseph LLP)


Defendant

Robert W. Brownlie
(Brownlie Hansen LLP)

Ryan T. Hansen
(Brownlie Hansen LLP)


Facts

NextFoods Inc. sells a line of fruit juice beverages: GoodBelly Probiotic JuiceDrinks. Evlyn Andrade-Heymsfield filed a class action suit in USDC Southern against NextFoods for purported violations of consumer protection and other laws.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: According to plaintiff, defendant's labeling of the JuiceDrinks--that it promotes "digestive health" thus promoting "overall health" and "overall wellness"--was misleading and false, omitting material facts regarding the harmful effects of the elevated sugar on both digestive and overall health. The sugar content of the drinks directly harmed digestive health. Moreover, the harmful effects of the elevated sugar content boosts an inflammatory response thereby increasing the risk for metabolic syndrome, obesity, and Type 2 Diabetes.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied that the labeling of the contested product violated any law. Moreover, defendant challenged the applicability of the studies plaintiff used as the basis for her argument. In response to pleading motions, the Court dismissed plaintiff's attempt at injunctive relief.

Result

Though denying any wrongdoing, defendant agreed to establish a $1.25 million settlement fund. Moreover, despite denying that its labeling was unlawful, defendant also agreed that it would make certain labeling changes for a specified period of time.


#142489

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390