Quantcast

Consumers allege Jamba Juice falsely represents smoothies are made with whole produce

LEGAL NEWSLINE

Sunday, December 22, 2024

Consumers allege Jamba Juice falsely represents smoothies are made with whole produce

Lawsuits
General court 07

shutterstock.com

OAKLAND, Calif. (Legal Newsline) – Two consumers allege that the ingredients in Jamba Juice smoothies are falsely marketed.

Teri Turner and David Lundquist filed a complaint on behalf of all others similarly situated on Aug. 23 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against Jamba Inc. and Jamba Juice Co. alleging violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law, California’s False Advertising Law, California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act and violation of New York’s Consumer Protection from Deceptive Acts and Practices Law.

According to the complaint, the defendants sell smoothies at retail locations and they advertise the drinks as "whole fruit and vegetable smoothies" that are "simple and nutritious." 

The plaintiffs allege that the drinks do not contain the ingredients, nutritional profile or benefits marketed by the defendants. The plaintiffs allege that the smoothies contain substituted ingredients that are high in sugar and calories.

The plaintiffs hold Jamba Inc. and Jamba Juice Co. responsible because the defendants allegedly falsely represent that the smoothies contain whole fruits and vegetables when they are made from concentrates.

The plaintiffs request a trial by jury and seek for any and all injunctive relief, statutory damages, monetary damages, including but not limited to any compensatory, incidental, or consequential damages and any and all equitable monetary relief. In addition, plaintiffs seek for punitive or exemplary damages, costs and expenses of suit, including attorneys’ fees and pre- and post-judgment interests. 

They are represented by Maia C. Kats and Matthew B. Simon of Center for Science in the Public Interest in Washington, D. C. and Michael R. Reese and George V. Granade of Reese LLP in New York.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California case number 4:18-cv-05168-DMR

More News