Ferrara Candy faces Jujyfruits slack fill class action
The company declined to comment when contacted by ConfectioneryNews.
San Franciscan resident Thomas Iglesias - represented by Clarkson law Firm - brought the class action in the northern district of California district court on February 21.
Claimant alleges opaque boxes misled
He alleges the opaque boxes of Jujyfruits 5oz (142 g) contain 59% candy and 41% empty space.
“Defendant intentionally misleads and shortchanges consumers by falsely and deceptively misrepresenting the amount of candy actually contained in each box of product,” says the suit.
Iglesias claims to have made a one-time purchase of the product for around $4 at a movie chain in San Francisco in 2016.
He says he relied on the opaque packaging and size of the box to make his purchase and claims he was misled.
The lawsuit says reasonable American consumers cannot discern the amount of candy in the box based on front and back of pack net weight declarations. He alleges the boxes are designed to deceive.
The lawsuit claims Ferrara Candy has violated the California Unfair Competition Law, the California False Advertising Law and the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act.
Other brands
The class action proposes to cover claimants purchasing Jujyfruits 5 oz throughout the US from February 21, 2013 to present.
It also aims to cover Ferrara products “substantially similar” to Jujyfruits that come in opaque boxes, including Lemonhead, RedHots, Trolli, Chuckles, Black Forest Gummi, Jawbuster/Jawbreaker, Brach’s, Super Bubble, Rainblo, and Atomic Fireball.
Slack fill suits
In October last year, a New York judge dismissed a class action lawsuit accusing Mondelēz International of deceiving consumers by allegedly slack filling Sour Patch Kids candy boxes.
In September 2015, another judge in New York dismissed a lawsuit accusing Perfetti Van Melle USA of slack filling Mentos chewing gum containers.
Source:
Iglesias v Ferrara Candy Co
February 22, 2017
United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Case 3:17-cv-00849
