Class Cert. Sought In Tito’s ‘Handmade’ Vodka Class Action Lawsuit

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

The plaintiffs in two class actions alleging a liquor distribution company tricked consumers by using “handmade” on Tito’s Handmade Vodka labels asked a California federal court judge to certify a proposed class of affected consumers.

In September of 2014, Fifth Generation Inc. was hit with a false advertising class action lawsuit alleging that the company deceptively marketed Tito’s Handmade Vodka, as “handmade” when the product in question was allegedly manufactured using machines.

Over the following year, numerous other Tito’s class action lawsuits were filed over the alleged deceptive labeling, including another in California.

The Tito’s Handmade Vodka class action lawsuits allege that the labels indicates the liquor is “Crafted in an Old Fashioned Pot Still by America’s Original Microdistillery,” but the vodka is actually mass produced in a huge industrial building in extremely large quantities, up to 500 cases an hour, according to the class actions.

The Tito’s vodka class action lawsuits claim that consumers paid more based on the vodka’s labeling than they would have had they known that Tito’s was mass produced.

Last week, a joint motion was filed in California federal court arguing for certification of a class of consumers who bought the vodka over the past four years by the plaintiffs in both California cases. The motion argues that all consumers were tricked by the labeling and Fifth Generation violated California state consumer protection laws.

“Accordingly, plaintiffs’ claims arise from a common nucleus of operative fact and pose a common question: Whether Fifth Generation’s labeling (and naming) of its product was unfair, deceptive, or misleading,” said the plaintiffs in their joint motion.

The motion further argued that the class action lawsuit’s claims that Fifth Generation’s allegedly violated California’s False Advertising and Unfair Competition Laws as well as the Consumer Legal Remedies Act support certification because they can be applied to the entire proposed class.

The motion contended that each individual’s response to the allegedly deceptive label would not need to be established to support these claims, but only whether consumers would likely to be deceived by the labels.

The joint motion also points out that both Tito’s Handmade Vodka class action lawsuits seek injunctive relief from the court. Additionally, both of the lead plaintiffs indicate they will purchase vodka again and may even purchase Tito’s Vodka in the future.

The Tito’s false advertising class action lawsuit survived a motion to dismiss made by Fifth Generation, who argued that because their labels were reviewed by a federal agency, they should be safe from claims under California state laws.

In November of this year, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey T. Miller ruled that federal review did not provide the “formal, deliberative process” required to exempt Tito’s from claims under the state laws.

Additionally, Judge Miller declined to merge the two California class action lawsuits because of the summary judgment motions.

Hofmann is represented by John H. Donboli and J.L. Sean Slattery of Del Mar Law Group LLP and Jonathan W. Cuneo and Taylor Asen of Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca LLP.

The Tito’s Handmade Vodka False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit is Gary Hofmann v. Fifth Generation Inc., Case No. 3:14-cv-02569, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.