Lawsuit of the Day: Another Fruity Class Action
When we were little, our parents let us eat Lucky Charms, Golden Grahams, and Chocolate Rice Krispies for breakfast. When we wanted to be ‘healthier’, we might eat Froot Loops. Over time, we came to realize that Toucan Sam did not offer any more nutritional value than Lucky the Leprechaun. (Now when we want morning fruit, we add bananas or blueberries to our oatmeal.)
Apparently, there are people in the world who didn’t have the same breakfast epiphany on the way to adulthood. They like to file lawsuits against breakfast companies for false advertising. The latest of these fruity lawsuit hails from San Francisco.
From San Francisco Weekly:
[Roy] Werbel recently filed a lawsuit in San Francisco federal court alleging that he bought and ate boxes of Froot Loops based on his mistaken belief the cereal contained fruit.Kellogg’s intentionally deceived consumers into buying Froot Loops by misleadingly using the word “froot” in the title, Werbel alleges. He demands unspecified punitive and actual damages, to be paid to all consumers who have mistakenly bought Froot Loops cereal. Had Werbel known that “Froot Loops contained no fruit, he would not have purchased it,” his suit alleges.
After being misled by Froot Loops, Werbel turned to Cap’n Crunch Crunchberries. To his shock and surprise, they have no real berries. So he filed a second lawsuit against the Cap’n. Apparently, he didn’t hear the crunch of fellow Californians’ identical similar suits getting dismissed earlier this summer.
All of these easily-deceived Californians fail to get points for creativity. The original fruity suit snap-crackle-and-popped way back in 1983. See Committee on Children’s Television, Inc. v.General Foods Corp. [PDF]. That one was also filed in the golden state.
This leads us to wonder what’s in the milk in California… besides fake fruit.
‘Froot’ Is Not Fruit, San Francisco Lawsuit Alleges [San Francisco Weekly]
Froot Loops and Cap’n Crunch False Advertising Claims Rejected [Martindale]
Committee on Children’s Television, Inc. v.General Foods Corp [PDF]
(68) 
Comments
Comments hidden for your protection. Show them anyway!
Elie
California is full of fruits & nuts. And idiots.
Way off topic, but does anybody know if Illinois bar results are going to be released tonight?
Damn, I love Froot Loops and Capn Crunch with Crunchberries. I hope these assclowns don't mess up my cereal.
#2,
the saying is:
California is like a bowl of cereal: take out the nuts and the fruits, and all you're left with are the flakes.
@3 - Yes
California = oversaturated with TTT (or worse!) law school grads.
holy contrib defense
I'm curious as to how Plaintiff would react to dingleberries?
Best of luck to everyone who took the Illinois Bar Exam!
fruity pebbles contain neither fruit nor pebbles. commencing law suit.
I hope everyone failed. Too many lawyers in Chicago.
President Lincoln was a lawyer in Illinois and he was never forced to PAY FOR and PASS any bar exam. Why do we have to do so now?
On the other hand, he did kill 620,000 of his countrymen in an effort to force them to join 'the union.'
Obama thinks he's the next Lincoln, and he wants to force us to get health care, and he's also in bed with different types of unions.
Will Obama kill thousands of Americans as well?
Toucan Sam, you leap on the back of the wind, load stone to assorted fruit flavors, Phoenix of the dawns, one smile. We gave you, Toucan Sam, life. You, Toucan Sam, give us loops of fruit. Fruity loops, Fruit Loopies, swimming in the churning, frothy mother sea of milk, Kellogg's appreciates consumer comments, P. O. Box 221, Battle Creek, Michigan, a prism of fruity color, a cornocopia of over forty fruity tastes. The orange, the apple, the grape, the pomegrante, the quince, the kumkwat, the kiwi, the planitain, the guava...
How can the attorneys who bring these claims explain what they do to other people without being embarrassed? ("So what did you do this week?" "File a class action complaint about fruit loops.")
It's unfortunate that these frivolous consumer lawsuits are the class actions that get coverage in the media when meanwhile there are so many other worthwhile, non-frivolous class actions for securities (although some, but not all, of those are frivolous too), racial and sex discrimination, etc.
When I was little, Mom let us eat Apple Jacks thinking they were "healthier" than Froot Loops. We longed for those Froots but she was adament. One day, we opened the box of Apple Jacks, poured em out and OMG. Out came Froot Loops. Fuck up at manufacturer I guess. We ate the whole box in 5 minutes so Mom never found out. Sadly, I realize now that that was the best day of my life.
Yummm...fruit.
I will give you what you need
All I want is your big fat seed
Give it to me, if you please
Give it to me, if you please
With all of the obvious and uninteresting stories on this website today, let me give you an idea for your next headline.
Peaple Who Make More Money Tend to be Wealthier Than Those Who Make Less.
you could write a story every bit was useless as the SA happiness story this morning.
13 = poor troll = failure.
California: Land of froots and knuts. (And phlakes, in honor of #5.)
Sounds like an MDL.
I'd enjoy Kash getting into my froot of the looms.
STFU # 13.
Lincoln was an exceptional president. He managed uncertainty without wavering and realized the paramount need to unite the country outweighed the costs involved.
It is my thought that Lincoln is top 3, along with Reagan and Kennedy. Indeed these were the greatest leaders in our nation's history, and their legacy shall not soon be forgotten.
If he killed people because he was trying to get them to join the union, were they really his countrymen?
This guy should sue Life cereal as he clearly has no life.
Shouldn't Lat have written this post?
Isn't it more likely that these lawsuits over the fruit content in sugared cereals are activist lawsuits and not actual lawsuits from people who are just dumb.
My guess is that these plaintiffs are fairly well-educated people that don't even eat sugared cereals, but they're sick of seeing unhealthy foods being paraded in front of unsuspecting parents as "healthier." They're probably just attempting to get cereal manufacturers to stop presenting their globs of sugar as somehow healthier than some other glob of sugar, but in order to have standing, they have to take the posture of someone who was tricked.
I will sue Kashmir Hill. I got with her because I wanted to feel cashmere on my skin. Instead, I felt cold sweaty clamy feel. This was clearly not what was advertised and I demand to be compensated.
I will sue Kashmir Hill. I got with her because I wanted to feel cashmere on my skin. Instead, I felt cold sweaty clamy feel. This was clearly not what was advertised and I demand to be compensated.
STFU # 13.
Lincoln was an exceptional president. He managed uncertainty without wavering and realized the paramount need to unite the country outweighed the costs involved.
It is my thought that Lincoln is top 3, along with Reagan and Kennedy. Indeed these were the greatest leaders in our nation's history, and their legacy shall not soon be forgotten.
re: Lincoln
Look, I'm from California (land of froots and nuts), so I really have no dog in this fight. BUT aren't states allowed to leave this voluntary union at will?
The south just wanted to be left alone. But Lincoln forced them to join under penalty of death. Couldn't he just have enticed them to join through bargaining?
And don't give me the slavery argument. Despite what our grade school teachers told us, it was hardly a main issue in that war.
"And don't give me the slavery argument. Despite what our grade school teachers told us, it was hardly a main issue in that war."
Unbelievable. Wow.
Imagine how many white people would be alive today if Lincoln didn't kill so many potential ancestors. Whites, you see, are a global minority. So Lincoln hated minorities. Obama also hates white people.
They have so much in common.
32, what, you haven't researched the civil war for yourself? Hell, even Lincoln didn't have much of a problem with slavery. Hate to be the one to fracture your revisionist history.
32, four Union states continued to have slavery during the Civil War. The Emancipation Proclamation specifically excluded those states. Look it up.
Also, this might shock some people. A quote from President Lincoln:
"I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of bringing about in any way the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not, nor ever have been, in favor of making voters or jurors of Negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And in as much as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race."
"Chocolate Rice Krispies"? You mean "Cocoa Krispies"
This is like a bad game of "telephone." From Froot Loops to Honest Abe in only 36 posts.
Lincoln's effort at "freeing the slaves" was more about creating social upheaval in the states trying to leave the Union. It's much easier to fight a society that is dealing with internal conflict, of course. The fact that he knew this is evidenced by the fact that he didn't free the slaves in the Union states -- he wanted to keep things 'in order" in the North.
The war was really about power and control, including suspension of habeas corpus in order to empower the White House. Over 350 people were arrested for voicing their displeasure with Lincoln's handling of the conflict.
Lincoln EVEN ORDERED the arrest of SUPREME COURT Chief Justice Roger Taney, when Taney referred to Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus as an act of despotism!
That's almost dictator-like.
And Obama wants to model his presidency around Lincoln. Remember his speech at the Illinois courthouse?
please stop writing as "we." you sound like perez hilton.
I'm glad my honest, if off-topic, question in #3 led to a discussion of Lincoln, the Civil War, and slavery.
My work here is done.
11 nailed it. Once you're a lawyer, you should root for everyone else to fail the bar exam. Because **** them.
Hi,
I am nice old Fillipino lady and David Lat's mom too. I never read such crap before like this blog. This website so over, so sad. David, time for you settle down with nice Fillipino girl. No more date man for you David, no spend time with man. It make you head sick. You no have judgment no more about blog, because sleep too many man.
-Mom
27 - no. These lawsuits are mainly about lawyers who want to make a bunch of money by suing over things that haven't harmed anyone. Nobody thinks Fruit Loops have fruit in them, they just want money. They don't give a crap about healthy food, or anything like that. They want $$.
Section 17200 is in the house!
46 - isn't that what 45 said?
I hope he wins these lawsuits. These kinds of cereals are TOTAL CRAP and have no nutritional value. The first ingredient is SUGAR. These types of products should be illegal.
48: Is that you, Kathleen Sebelius, you ignorant little fascist?
I want to sue the makers of Pop Tarts. There is neither pop nor tarts in these boxes. Just dried up pieces of crap with some gooy substance in the middle. Lay iight like that.
Werbel's Dad
"Now when we want morning fruit, we add bananas or blueberries to our oatmeal."
Kash my dear - when you feel like some morning wood I have something for you to add as well.
- OATMEAL STUD
#36
, If that quote is in fact something Lincoln said, I am certain you are taking it way out of context. Moreover, you have no idea how difficult it must have been to keep the country united. Like most conflicts, propaganda and undoubtedly some level of social unrest were an issue.
36, you could never be on President Lincoln's level and I am truly disappointed by your lack of appreciation for his accomplishments.
52, lol. It's a direct quote from the Lincoln-Douglas debate, and I'm not sure how you can take such a significant series of statements 'out of context.'
The question, however, is whether it was worth the deaths of 620,000 people to 'keep the Union together' through FORCE. Lincoln could have heeded the states' concerns (high taxes, high regulation, etc.) and possibly worked a compromise. Or, he could have allowed them to leave with the hope that they would rejoin sometime in the future; if the North became attractive again, the North could have promised to welcome any states (or individuals) with open arms. No one has to die.
But that wasn't even on the radar, it seems. It was all about amassing federal power over states' rights. I don't know that the deaths of so many is justified by maintaining a union through force: Should the EU start bombing Switzerland and killing Swiss people if the state decides it no longer wants to be part of the EU? Lincoln would answer affirmatively.
-- 36
53/36, 52 here,
Continue being an unappreciative ignorant; still it pains me that you are able to enjoy the same privilege as myself, of being a citizen of this great nation.
I concede, it is unfortunate we cannot go back in time. You make some notable suggestions here, despite your impractical reasoning. There is simply no telling what result would have came about had these alternatives been taken.
To answer your question, the quote is used out of context because you clearly have no understanding of the historical, social, and economic backdrop and you seem to imply that others should read it with that same ignorance.
Is your last paragraph really comparing Switzerland's relations with the EU to secession of the Southern states? The two are hardly comparable examples.
"Both parties deprecated war; but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive; and the other would accept war rather than let it perish. And the war came.."
-Abraham Lincoln
48 = Mr. Righteous Indignation
"Should the EU start bombing Switzerland and killing Swiss people if the state decides it no longer wants to be part of the EU?"
First, Switzerland is a sovereign nation, not a state. Second, Switzerland is not, and has never been, part of EU.
Epic fucking fail, 53.
@ 34, and all you other trolls -- So when Lincoln said "If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong," I guess he was just having early Alzheimer's? There is trolling, and there is being a complete fucking moron asshole. Thank you for showing us the difference. Now go wrap yourself in the Confederate flag and die a slow painful death.
Yet another reason I will NEVER live in California.
56
You're a fucking moron, the Swiss aren't part of the EU. If you're going to try and "Fail" someone, make sure you aren't a fucking retard failing yourself.
Epic Fucking Fail right back at you 56
59 can you read?
The attorney(s) who filed these cases should be disciplined.
The attorney(s) should be disciplined and the plaintiff should pay the attorney fees of the defense.
Another example of why tort reform is necessary.
i'd kill for a box of fruit brute..
http://www.greentreegazette.com/rememberthis/load.aspx?art=733
This was already litigated in the 1950s when Kellogg was sued for misleading advertising. That's why it's now called "FROOT" Loops rather than "FRUIT" Loops.
This is why people hate lawyers.
@ 56: First, see def'n of State at private international law
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_(law)
Second, though not a signatory to the EU charter, it might as well be from any other perspective...
http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/switzerland/index_en.htm
The South is glad they lost the Civil War, they would be way more backwards they they are now yet still get to complain about losing the war, which they LOVE to do. It also works out for the South because they receive way more in federal aid than they put in, which basically means the North (and the rest of the country) pays the South to complain and not contribute (save maybe Atlanta) in any other way.
A good post, very helpful information.
http://www.lowerpainback.com/