LOS ANGELES (Legal Newsline) — A Minnesota attorney said there is difficulty in bringing lawsuits like a recent case against Krispy Kreme involving the definition of fruit ingredients in food, particularly packaged foods.

Jason Saidian of Los Angeles County filed a class action complaint, for himself and those similarly situated, Nov. 9 in U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, alleging Krispy Kreme Doughnuts Inc. made false advertising claims about its ingredients of a particular food product.

Minnesota attorney Chris Kennedy, of Kennedy & Kennedy Law Firm in Mankato, said there tends to be more confusion these days among many consumers over labels like "contains real fruit," "made with real fruit," "made from real fruit," "natural" and so forth. 

Kennedy, who often comments on cases in the media in Minnesota, is confident the case will go nowhere in court.

"I think you would have a tough time trying to sue Krispy Kreme in this case," Kennedy said. "What damages could be caused from this? Can they prove real damages? It would be real tough." 

He said companies face increasing numbers of lawsuits from consumers who continue to demand more "real" ingredients in their food. However, there is debate about what that term means to the food industry versus the consumers who purchase their goods. 

"There have been a number of juice companies, for example, sued over the years over the definitions used in their product labeling," Kennedy said in an interview with Legal Newsline. 

The complaint stated Saidian sustained monetary damages from purchasing the Krispy Kreme products that were inadequately labeled and misled him to make the purchase based on that labeling. Also in the complaint, the plaintiff alleges Krispy Kreme makes the claim that this particular package of doughnuts contains blueberry when the product does not contain any actual blueberries. 

Maple and raspberry-filled doughnuts are also part of the ingredients claim that are allegedly misrepresented by the company. 

Legal Newsline reached out to Krispy Kreme but spokeswoman Sarah Roof said the company does not comment on pending litigation. 

Saidan seeks a jury trial, compensatory and punitive damages, interest, restitution, injunctive relief, court costs and all relief the court grants. His attorneys are Barbara A. Rohr and Benjamin Heikali of Faruqi & Faruqi LLP in Los Angeles.

Want to get notified whenever we write about U.S. District Court for the Central District of California ?
Next time we write about U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, we'll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.

Organizations in this Story

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
312 N Spring St
Los Angeles, CA - 90012

More News