Chobani beats class action over 'zero sugar' label
May 29 (Reuters) - Chobani escaped a proposed class action over claims its 'Chobani Zero Sugar' yogurt actually contains sugar, after an Illinois federal judge on Thursday said the labeling met U.S. Food and Drug Administration requirements.
The lawsuit accused Chobani of misleading consumers by failing to count the allulose – a fruit-derived sweetener – in the sugar content of its 'Zero Sugar' products.
U.S. District Judge John Tharp Jr. in Chicago said U.S. Food and Drug Administration regulations govern how the yogurt is labeled and outweigh state consumer protection laws about labeling.
The agency has not definitively said whether allulose is counted as sugar in its regulation governing nutrition labels for food products, but it has said that it is not currently treating allulose as a sugar and won't go after companies that leave it out of their products' sugar content listed on the label, Tharp said.
Tharp dismissed the claims brought by the named plaintiffs and the proposed class of nationwide consumers.
Attorneys for Chobani did not immediately respond to requests for comment, nor did attorneys for the proposed class.
Four shoppers from Illinois, Arizona and Kansas filed the lawsuit in 2023, claiming they were misled by the 'Zero Sugar' labeling on the yogurts. Allulose is a monosaccharide or simple sugar with a chemical structure similar to fructose, so it isn't 'zero sugar,' the shoppers said.
The lawsuit, which brought claims under 37 states' consumer protection laws, sought damages and disgorgement of Chobani's profits, among other things.
Chobani moved to dismiss the lawsuit, pointing to the FDA's statements on allulose. Allowing the lawsuit to move forward would deter the use of a sugar-substitute that the FDA believes could improve public health by reducing sugar consumption, the company said.
Tharp agreed, saying that while the FDA hasn't issued its definitive statement on allulose, its comments on how it views allulose have expressly authorized the 'Zero Sugar' label.
The case is Jason Franco et al v. Chobani LLC, U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, No. 1:23-cv-03047.
For Chobani: Drew Tulumello of Weil, Gotshal & Manges; and Erik Ives of Fox Swibel Levin & Carroll
For the plaintiffs: Yates French and Heather Kramer of Rathje Woodward; and Alexander Burke of Burke Law Offices
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
29 minutes ago
- Reuters
English court bars jailed Russian tycoon from appealing in Transneft case
MOSCOW, June 5 (Reuters) - The English Court of Appeal has refused jailed Russian tycoon Ziyavudin Magomedov permission to appeal against a decision that threw out his $14 billion lawsuit against Russian oil pipeline monopoly Transneft and other firms, the company said. Magomedov sued the company and several others at London's High Court, alleging his 2018 arrest on embezzlement charges prompted a Russian state-supported scheme to strip him of his holdings in valuable port operators. In January, Transneft, as well as U.S. private equity firm TPG (TPG.O), opens new tab and other companies, won their bid to block Magomedov's London lawsuit. Transneft said late on Wednesday that the English Court of Appeal denied Magomedov permission to appeal the ruling. "It is clear from the English process that there are massive losses which Mr Magomedov has suffered as a result of wrongdoing against him. He will continue to seek justice and a fair outcome wherever he can," a spokesperson for Magomedov said. Magomedov once controlled an empire ranging from port logistics to oil and gas through his Summa Group conglomerate, which he founded with his brother Magomed. But the brothers were arrested on embezzlement and organised crime charges in one of the most high-profile prosecutions of its kind in years. Magomedov was sentenced to 19 years in jail in 2022. He says the charges against him are unfounded and unsuccessfully appealed against his conviction.
Daily Mail
2 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Sports Direct-owned gym blames former model's heatstroke sauna death on 'alcohol use and medication' as it fights £100k lawsuit by her actress daughter
A gym owned by Sports Direct has blamed an ex-model's sauna death on alcohol and medication as it battles a £100,000 lawsuit brought by her actress daughter. Mileva Brooks, 75-year-old mother of TV comedy actress Milanka Brooks, died after suffering heatstroke at an Everlast gym in Cheltenham in August 2022. Her daughter, who starred in TV sitcoms Benidorm, The Windsors and My Family as well as satire Black Mirror, is suing the Sports Direct-owned gym chain at London's High Court. A coroner's inquest in September 2023 found the pensioner died three days after being rushed to hospital when other gym users alerted staff that she had collapsed in the sauna and was experiencing breathing difficulties. But in their defence to the action lodged at London 's High Court, Fitness Ltd deny any blame. And they claim Mileva Brooks 'had a documented history of substance abuse, including but potentially not limited to alcoholism, along with medical conditions consistent with the use of prescribed medication'. Milanka, 41, found fame starring in a number of TV sitcoms after being cast in multi award-winning BBC1 sitcom My Family in 2000 after graduating from drama school. She had a regular role in ITV's Benidorm, playing Johnny Vegas' fiancée Ionela, as well as portraying Princess Svetlana in Channel 4's Royal family parody The Windsors and Nigel Planer's wife Elena in 2014 BBC2 comedy Boomers. She then found success in a high-profile role as a blue-faced alien crew member, Elena Tulaska, in the multi-Emmy Award winning Black Mirror episode called USS Callister in 2017. She has described her mother Mileva as her 'best friend in the world'. Mileva collapsed and died after using the sauna at the Everlast gym, in Henrietta Street in Cheltenham, on August 26 2022, having joined the gym six months earlier. Roland Wooderson, assistant coroner for Gloucestershire, recorded a narrative verdict after an inquest in 2023. She said the former model had 'died from the effects of heatstroke' after being 'found unresponsive in the sauna of the gym'. He had earlier heard medical evidence that Mileva's body temperature was 39.2C when measured by paramedics attending the scene. According to legal documents filed at London's High Court, Ms Brooks is now suing the gym's owners, claiming 'damages in excess of £50,000, but limited to £100,000'. The action comes in her role as administrator of her mother's estate for 'personal injury and consequential losses' and under the Fatal Accidents Act 1976. But in a defence now lodged with the court by Natalie Green for Sports Direct, the company claims the staff at the gym did nothing wrong. Ms Green said: 'The deceased had a documented history of substance abuse, including but potentially not limited to alcoholism, along with medical conditions consistent with the use of prescribed medication.' She added that a post-mortem had found traces of the antidepressant lorazepam and epilepsy drugs clobazam and lamotrigine in Mileva's system. The barrister said there had been a sign outside the sauna stating conditions of safe use, including: 'Do not use the sauna if you suffer from epilepsy.' She added: 'The defendant replies upon the totality of the said signages' content, in particular the full list of conditions mandating non-use of the sauna, which include those relating to prior alcohol use and or medication impacting on the advisability of sauna use. 'By the publication of such guidance to its members, the defendant acted reasonably in the discharge of its duty of care. 'In the alternative, should breach of duty be proved against the defendant, the court may be invited to reduce any award of damages on account of the deceased's contributory negligence. 'The deceased suffered from temporal epilepsy and therefore should not have been using the sauna.' Ms Green added that the gym group would be calling for expert evidence 'as to the potential effects of any prescribed or controlled substances or alcohol in her system at the point of accessing the sauna'. She also claimed that a member of staff checked the sauna twice during the time the former model was in there and saw no cause for concern. She added: 'The deceased was recorded on CCTV as having entered the sauna at 14.15. The CCTV coverage of the wet areas did not include the interior of the sauna for reasons of privacy and practicality. '(But) the contemporaneous evidence indicated that the deceased was lying down on an upper bench throughout her time in the sauna on a towel with her eyes closed and her head supported by a foam pool weight. It is a position consistent with normal sauna use. 'It is clear from the contemporaneous evidence that a visual check into the sauna would have been unlikely to have elicited any cause for alarm. 'It is not admitted that the deceased was slumped in the sauna. The deceased was lying in a conventional position for sauna use and concern was only raised as to the manner of her breathing just prior to the alarm being raised at 15.15. 'At 15.00 the deceased continued to lie in a normal position for a sauna user. The index incident is unique in the history of the defendant's operation of gym and spa facilities. 'The sauna in question was less than a year old at the material time and there was no evidence that the sauna was defective. 'Members were provided with comprehensive guidance as to their safe use of the sauna and there was in place an alarm button,' the Sports Direct barrister said. In online posts, Milanka Brooks has spoken repeatedly of the close relationship she enjoyed with her mother - calling her 'the light and inspiration of my life,' her 'partner in crime' and 'best friend in the world'. In 2020, Frasers Group, the Sports Direct parent company, bought a number of DW Sports Fitness locations out of administration and started the Everlast Gyms chain. By late 2023, they had nearly 60 branches located across the UK.
Daily Mail
5 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Does someone else have a mortgage on my new home? CRANE ON THE CASE
I bought and moved in to a new flat in May last year. Since then, I have received regular letters from Barclays, addressed to a woman I don't recognise and who is not the previous owner. I've been returning the letters as 'not at this address'. As I have a Barclays credit card, I recently opened one by mistake. I was horrified to find it related to an offset mortgage this person appeared to hold at my address. I called Barclays, but it said it couldn't tell me anything about the mortgage account due to data protection. I'm worried about fraud and just want confirmation there is no other mortgage at my address. D.G, West Midlands Helen Crane, This is Money's consumer champion, replies: What a shock it must have been to open that envelope and see what looked like another mortgage on your home. When you bought the maisonette with your sister about a year ago, you took out a mortgage with Halifax. If there was another charge on the property at this time, it's very unlikely this would have evaded the attention of the bank, not to mention your lawyer. In rare cases, though, these things can be missed. I wrote last year about a reader who only discovered his garden was leasehold 17 years after buying the house. You also checked the Land Registry, as well as speaking to neighbours to make sure no one had accidentally given Barclays the wrong flat number. All of these yielded nothing, suggesting there was no second mortgage. However, I can still see why you were concerned. Many of us are on high alert for fraud at the moment, and with good reason. For example, I've written previously in this column about fraudsters stealing unsuspecting people's addresses to register a businesses with Companies House. If that can go undetected, who knows what else might be possible. You contacted Barclays looking for reassurance. However, you were told by the person on the phone that they couldn't even bring up the account on their screen, as you weren't the customer named on the mortgage. I understand that banks must abide by the general data protection regulation (GDPR). It wouldn't be appropriate for Barclays to tell you the details of this person's mortgage (though you already knew a fair amount thanks to the letter) or where they really live. That said, I don't see how confirming to you that there was no Barclays mortgage on your own home, provided you showed the proper proof of address, would be breaking any rules. I contacted the bank to try and solve this mortgage mystery. I'm pleased to report Barclays quickly responded to say it had stopped the letters to your address. It also confirmed that it didn't hold a mortgage on your property, and that this was not a case of fraud. I understand the letters had been delivered to you because of an administrative mistake by another customer, and that the bank wasn't at fault. Barclays could not give any more detail due to data protection, which is understandable. But I have pieced together the information I have to come up with my own theory which I think fits. The letter had your address listed at the top, as the correspondence address, but nowhere did it mention the address of the property the mortgage was held on. Therefore, I believe the mortgage was on a different property. You mentioned to me previously that the person you bought your flat from had rented it out sometimes. You hadn't looked into the tenant's details, as it wouldn't make sense for them to be receiving post about a mortgage on the home they rented - which you assumed this was. But I think that mortgage letters, while sent to your address, related to a mortgage on another home - one that is owned by one of these tenants. While it's not common, there are many circumstances where a renter might have a mortgage on another property. Perhaps they are working away temporarily, going through a divorce, renting while their house is renovated or are even a buy-to-let landlord themselves. When this person moved on, I believe they redirected all their other post - but forgot to tell Barclays about their new correspondence address. As many people now manage their mortgage online, it is easier for this to slip the mind. I could be wrong, but this version of events makes most sense to me. Either way, you said you are pleased the letters are now going to their rightful recipient, and the snap of the letterbox no longer brings a sense of dread.
