{"id":36378,"date":"2025-04-09T13:53:17","date_gmt":"2025-04-09T20:53:17","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/uprinting.com\/?p=36378"},"modified":"2025-10-27T19:39:32","modified_gmt":"2025-10-28T02:39:32","slug":"famous-packaging-label-lawsuits","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.uprinting.com\/blog\/famous-packaging-label-lawsuits\/","title":{"rendered":"5 High-Profile Packaging Label Lawsuits"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n
\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n
\n

A deceptive or inaccurate packaging label confuses consumers about the\u00a0product\u2019s ingredients, qualities, benefits, and other critical\u00a0information. Thus, consumer protection laws and regulations exist that\u00a0prohibit businesses from giving a false impression, either intentionally\u00a0or unintentionally.<\/p>

Failure to adhere to the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act (FPLA) and\u00a0other similar laws and regulations can expose consumers to health risks\u00a0and lead to legal issues and hefty fines for manufacturers and sellers.<\/p>

Here are some of the most high-profile packaging label lawsuits that\u00a0involved big corporations. Some of these cases had been dismissed due to\u00a0lack of grounds, while others were resolved through settlement.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>

\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n

\n1. Subway\u2019s \u201c100% Tuna\u201d Lawsuit\n<\/h2>
\n

In January 2021, a Californian customer filed a lawsuit against\u00a0fast-food giant Subway, claiming that its tuna products contained\u00a0ingredients other than tuna. The plaintiff, Nilima Amin, claimed to\u00a0have ordered Subway tuna products more than 100 times before filing\u00a0a lawsuit against the fast-food giant.<\/p>

But after six months of litigation, a California-based judge\u00a0dismissed the case after Amin ended the lawsuit, claiming that her\u00a0difficult pregnancy left her unable to pursue the case.<\/p>\n<\/div>

\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n
\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n
\n

Moreover, the judge rejected the plaintiff\u2019s insistence that tuna was\u00a0the only acceptable ingredient, arguing that other ingredients such as\u00a0mayonnaise were okay and a \u201cfact of life.\u201d<\/p>

Subway representatives said the lawsuit and the plaintiff\u2019s claims\u00a0resulted in the spread of harmful information, causing damage to the\u00a0brand and its franchisees.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>

\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n\"\"\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>
\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n

\n2. Kind Bars vs. FDA\n<\/h2>
\n

In March 2015, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA) issued a\u00a0warning letter to snack company KIND, saying some of its bars \u2014 like\u00a0the Fruit & Nut Almond & Apricot bar and the Fruit & Nut Almond &\u00a0Coconut \u2014 should remove the term \u201chealthy\u201d from its website and\u00a0product packaging.<\/p>

Snack foods labeled with \u201chealthy\u201d cannot have more than 3 grams of\u00a0total fat or 1 gram of saturated fat per serving, according to the\u00a0FDA regulations. However, KIND argued that although the fat content\u00a0of its products exceeded the current rules, it came from nuts and\u00a0thus considered healthy.<\/p>\n<\/div>

\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n
\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n\n<\/div>
\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n
\n

About a year after receiving the FDA warning, KIND was allowed to use\u00a0the term \u201chealthy\u201d again on its products. But there is one caveat: The\u00a0snack company can only use the term provided that it\u2019s \u201cpresented as its\u00a0corporate philosophy\u201d and not as a nutrition claim.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>

\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n

\n3. Vanilla & Honey Fraud Cases\n<\/h2>
\n

However, a judge from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District\u00a0of California dismissed the class action lawsuit, explaining that the\u00a0challenged label did not contain any other words or image that could\u00a0have suggested that the flavor was derived exclusively from vanilla\u00a0beans.<\/p>

Honey Bunches of Oats also faced a similar legal woe. In 2019,\u00a0plaintiffs claimed the company\u2019s cereal products had misleading and\u00a0deceptive labeling and marketing. They also mentioned the branding\u00a0and packaging that included a wooden honey dipper dripping with\u00a0honey.<\/p><\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>

\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n
\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n
\n

Many food brands use the terms \u201creal vanilla\u201d or \u201cpure honey\u201d despite\u00a0using cheaper artificial substitutes, leading to class-action lawsuits.\u00a0For example, Whole Foods Market Inc. was sued in 2021 for allegedly\u00a0tricking consumers into thinking the vanilla in its \u201c365 Vanilla\u00a0Almondmilk\u201d came mainly from vanilla beans.<\/p>

However, a Massachusetts federal court dismissed the lawsuit against\u00a0the food company, explaining that the packaging contained an\u00a0accurate ingredient list and thus no reasonable consumer would be\u00a0misled about the honey content of the cereal.<\/p>

The federal court also argued that the cereals\u2019 packaging labels\u00a0made no claims about the \u201cobjective and measurable quantity of\u00a0honey.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>

\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n\"\"\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>
\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n

\n4. Welch\u2019s Fruit Snacks Misleading Labeling\n<\/h2>
\n

Welch\u2019s Fruit Snacks have been the subject of multiple class action\u00a0lawsuits alleging the company of using misleading labels. For\u00a0instance, a group of plaintiffs filed a case in September 2015\u00a0arguing that the snacks contained mostly a combination of corn\u00a0syrup, sugar, modified corn starch, dyes, juice from concentrate,\u00a0and artificial flavors. They also argued that \u201cthese are no more\u00a0healthful than candy.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>

\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n
\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n\n<\/div>
\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n
\n

U.S. Magistrate Judge Vera M. Scanlon also said the Fruit Snacks\u00a0packaging is more deceptive than the packaging in Gerber fruit juice\u00a0snacks.<\/p>

As part of a class action settlement, the company paid $1.5 million and\u00a0altered the labels on some of its fruit snacks and the information on\u00a0its website.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>

\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n

\n5. Red Bull\u2019s \u201cIt Gives You Wings\u201d Settlement\n<\/h2>
\n

Red Bull settled two class action lawsuits and agreed to pay $13\u00a0million to US customers. The terms of the settlement allowed\u00a0customers who purchased Red Bull products between Jan. 1, 2002 and\u00a0Oct. 3, 2014 to receive a cash payment worth $10, or $15 worth of\u00a0Red Bull products.<\/p>\n<\/div>

\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n
\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n
\n

The plaintiffs argued that they were misled by the company\u2019s\u00a0exaggerated claims about the benefits of drinking Red Bull,\u00a0particularly the slogan \u201cRed Bull gives you wings.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>

\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n\"\"\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>
\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n

\nThe Bottom Line\n<\/h2>
\n

Proper labeling<\/a>\u00a0protects businesses from expensive litigations and hefty\u00a0legal fines and prevents confusion and potential harm to consumers. In\u00a0addition, it shows a company\u2019 s commitment to the safety and health of\u00a0people.<\/p>

Clear, easy-to-understand, and accurate labeling also builds consumer\u00a0trust, which is the key to brand loyalty and repeat business.<\/p>

If you don\u2019t know how to create an effective label for your product,\u00a0check out\u00a0UPrinting\u2019s beginner\u2019s guide<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0that also explains the key parts of a label, the different types of\u00a0labels (legal information, back label, and front label), and among\u00a0others.<\/p>

ed Bull products.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>

\n \n \n\t\n\n\n\n

\nfrequently asked questions\n<\/h2>
\n

\n