NEW YORK (Legal Newsline) - Most of a class action over grains in bagels at Starbucks will get to continue, thanks to a federal judge's ruling on Sept. 12.
New York judge J. Paul Oetken granted a small part of Starbucks' motion to dismiss the case while denying the rest, finding the plaintiffs can proceed with their claims of violations of consumer protection laws of New York and California.
Plaintiffs Eric Schleyer and Emilyn Miskhan filed suit in December, alleging Starbucks is falsely and deceptively marketing Sprouted Grain bagels because the bagels are primarily made with "traditionally, non-sprouted grains" and that consumers pay a "premium price" for the product based on Starbuck's false advertising claims.
The plaintiffs allege that Starbuck's uses "sprouted grain" to deceive consumers who purchase the bagels because sprouted grains are "more premium and desirable" than non-sprouted grains. Specifically, the plaintiffs claim sprouted grains have less starch, lower carbs and a lower glycemic index and include more nutrients.
"Regardless of whether the bagels are fit for ordinary use, Mishkan has adequately pleaded that the bagels do not conform to the label's promise that the bagel's primary ingredient is 'sprouted grain,'" Oetken wrote.
Calling them "Sprouted Grain" bagels could mislead consumers into believing their primary ingredient is sprouted grain, Oetken found.
Oetken will allow to continue claims for breach of implied warranty under California and New York law. He dismissed unjust enrichment claims under New York law but allowed the California version to proceed.