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.
This settlement is closed!
Please see what other class action settlements you might qualify to claim cash from in our Open Settlements directory!
A settlement has been reached in a class action lawsuit alleging StarKist Co. under-filled some of its 5-ounce canned tuna products in violation of state and federal law. If you purchased StarKist tuna, you could be entitled to compensation from the class action settlement.
According to the StarKist tuna class action lawsuit, which was filed in February 2013 by plaintiff Patrick Hendricks, federal law requires 5-ounce cans to contain an average of 2.84 to 3.23 ounces of tuna. However, Hendricks alleges that 5-ounce cans of StarKist tuna only contain an average of 2.81 to 3.11 ounces of tuna.
Hendricks claims he would not have purchased the StarKist tuna products if he had known they did not contain an adequate amount of tuna for a 5-ounce can. He filed the class action lawsuit on behalf of himself and a Class of consumers who purchased the allegedly under-filled cans of StarKist tuna.
StarKist denies the allegations but has agreed to settle the class action lawsuit to avoid the expense and risk associated with continued litigation.
Under the terms of the proposed class action settlement, StarKist will pay $8 million in cash and $4 million in vouchers that are redeemable for StarKist tuna products.
UPDATE: On Feb. 19, 2016, a federal judge denied final approval to the StarKist tuna settlement, calling the deal “unfair” for consumers. A case management conference has been set for March 15, 2016. Top Class Actions will continue to post updates to the case as they’re made available. You can receive these updates by signing up for our free newsletter and/or marking this article as a “Favorite” using your free Top Class Actions account to receive automatic notifications when this article is updated.
UPDATE 2: As of August 11, 2016, the settlement is still on hold. The judge has not issued a decision, and currently has attorney’s fees under review. Please be patient and keep checking Top Class Actions for updates.
UPDATE 3: On Sept. 29, 2016, a California federal judge gave final approval to a revised $12 million class action settlement over allegations StarKist Co. underfilled cans of tuna, causing consumers to overpay for the product.
UPDATE 4: On October 25, 2016, an appeal to the revised Starkist settlement was filed. Claims will not be paid until all appeals are exhausted. We appreciate your ongoing patience. Top Class Actions will continue to provide updates as we learn more.
UPDATE 5: On Oct. 19, 2018, a $12 million StarKist Tuna class action settlement survived the appeals process in the Ninth Circuit, meaning that the settlement can finally move forward.
UPDATE 6: On Sept. 21, 2019, Top Class Actions viewers started receiving checks in the amount of $2.38 or $5.03 in coupons from a StarKist Tuna class action settlement. Congratulations to everyone who filed a claim and got PAID!
Who’s Eligible
Class Members of the StarKist tuna settlement include all U.S. residents who purchased any of the following StarKist products between Feb. 19, 2009 and Oct. 31, 2014:
- 5 oz. Chunk Light in Water
- 5 oz. Chunk Light in Oil
- 5 oz. Solid White in Water
- 5 oz. Solid White in Oil
NOTE: StarKist 5 oz. Chunk White in Water is not included in the class action settlement.
Potential Award
Class Members may elect to receive either a cash payment of $25 or $50 in product vouchers redeemable for StarKist tuna products.
Depending on the number of claims filed, the actual amount each Class Member will receive may be reduced on a pro rata basis.
Proof of Purchase
None required. However, Class Members must submit a Claim Form confirming under the penalty of perjury (1) the specific StarKist product(s) purchased and (2) that the purchases were made between Feb. 19, 2009 and Oct. 31, 2014.
Claim Form Deadline
11/20/2015
Case Name
Hendricks v. StarKist Co., Case No. 13-cv-00729-HSG, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Final Hearing
12/17/2015
Settlement Website
Claims Administrator
Hendricks v. StarKist Co. Settlement Administrator
P.O. Box 40007
College Station, TX 77842-4007
1-888-643-6376
Class Counsel
Scott A. Bursor
BURSOR & FISHER PA
If you have questions about the StarKist tuna class action settlement, you may contact Class Counsel at info@bursor.com
Defense Counsel
Robert Hawk
HOGAN LOVELLS LLP
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2024 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.
398 thoughts onStarKist Tuna Class Action Settlement
Starkist is the only tuna I buy. I buy 5 cans per week at a minimum. No telling how many cans I purchased during this time frame.
That’s how I feel. My family has been doing high protein and tuna is easy and versatile. Especially in the summer months when we eat lighter. I used at least 3 cans in meal prep, at least twice a week. This is a little unsettling. Eleven years of shortage… I cannot begin to do the math. Pisses me off.
T he tuna in water is the best..I buy 5-10 cans a month. It’s great for salads or cassaroles
would it be so petty if they put in more then 0.12 a can you figure they save millions by shorting the cans and they know they are doing it
8 million in cash to lawyers ! That is what is wrong ! I know some great charities they could donate that to !
So do I, unfortunately the charty would put 10% to the bottom line and we would still have 6.2 million that’s still slime covered.
Oops 7.2…It’s Friday ;-D
I ate countless amount of this brand of tuna.
I love the starkest tuna in water. Makes great tuna salad
This seems very petty to me, to bring a class action lawsuit against a company because it is filled 0.03 to 0.12 ounces less than what it should have been. Priorities people. Did you really miss that small amount of tuna that was not in the can?
I think a shortage of almost 2 ounces a can,is not being petty.If you figure how many cans they did that to.Do you like paying full price for something that isn’t all there,or as stated it is when you bought it???
Ummm… its not 2 ounces per can. Yes, I agree. Very petty!
.12/3.00 ounces = 4% underweight…. While the average user may not realize a 4% difference in weight, multiplying that by millions of cans would result in a tremendous profit to Starkist. A profit that is created solely by selling less than the legally required quantity of Tuna.
It’s Sunkist for 1 and how is it that anyone found out about the under filled cans? Does someone go shopping and bring everything home and open everything and weight it? I don’t like paying for somethung I’m not getting, but I don’t go around weighting everthing!
Interesting. The law states that a 5 ounce can of tuna can contain an average of 2.84 to 3.23 ounces of tuna. So the lawsuit is about a very small amount – saying there was actually 2.81 to 3.11 ounces. Perhaps the issue is with the Federal governments labelling standards. I imagine that water or oil makes up the difference and the 5 ounce label is misleading to most consumers.
I suggest that there was on occasion a lot less then 2.8 ounces. I wrote them a complaining letter about 2010 containing phrases like: Used to use a fork to pry the tuna out of the can. But no longer. Now, it pours out. They wrote back and said they had to use fluid to pack the tuna. I am diabetic, so a lot of my food gets weighed. I have found tuna cans with only 2.1 ounces of tuna after the water drips off.
0.12 or less. 1/10th of an ounce or less. with 55 /10ths per can, we are talking about 1/55th of the can. Not even sure you could actually even tell that without some really good equipment. I mean, it would be like missing one half of an m&m out of the bag. Hey! Let’s get some free m&m’s.
yes
it’s not petty when companies make millions and millions and billions of dollars every year we expect to get what we pay for in by shortening it even that simple littlest amount can add up to million every year so yes I want mine back
Obviously no however it does make an overall consumption adds up. The price is for the content which then is false advertising, if they get away with under filling their cans which are not product viewable, other companies will do the same and eventually they will be extracting huge profits by screwing buyers. Cheating should never win. Don’t file. Then you make a valid point. If you file now you will be a hypocrite.
I do not think you would find it petty if you are paying for gas by the gallon. but are only getting 3/4 of a gallon of gas. That comes to for every 4 gallons of gas you are paying for you are only getting 3 gallons of gas. In a 16 gallon tank for a car that comes to 3 gallons of gas that you are not getting. So it is not petty! It all adds up when these corporations pull this garbage. Like the same price so they will still buy are products but we will just lower the ounces over the next 2years and we will reap huge profits. That is what they do. As no one has time to look at every item they buy. What is the cost per ounce.
Realistically, that translates to thousands, if not millions, of dollars they kept by the slight underweight difference in cases and cases of cans. Does that mean everyone can skim pennies from you for every purchase you make? That would add up quickly, would it not? If you don’t think so, may I be your accountant?
It is not much to the individual consumer, but for every 1,000 cans they short, they save enough tuna for an additional 40 cans or $60 pure profit.
that is not the point.How many millions of dollars did they make by doing this?as they say the rules are the rules
2 ounces per can times X amount of cans sold equals thousands of dollars. What if everybody shorted the Sunkist Co. $0.10 per can, then what. Was this done on purpose? You do the math.
Why are so many people calling this Sunkist?
Why the hell is everyone saying: ( SUNKIST ) for Gods sake ???? Its ( STARKIST, STARKIST, STARKIST, ) for the love of Pete you fools !!!!!!
chill Brenda! its only fish…
LOL
I MISSED THE DEADLINE ON THE TUNA..
The point of the lawsuit is to drive the message to StarKist that the consumer should get exactly what they pay for and as advertised, nothing less in accordance with Federal law which requires 5 ounce cans to contain between 2.84-ounces and 3.23-ounces of tuna, depending on the type. If consumers are not aggressive then makers/manufacturers of goods and services will take advantage.
Its called stealing!!! you must not have any idea of how much they profited on this scam…people like you are whats wrong with the world today
I agree absolutely. I am fed up with people who just sit back, do nothing, and then complain about those of us who are well aware when we are getting the screws put to us. Take a company that rounds out their bill to the nearest dollar ( not owed to them however). Get enough customers being scammed like this, and the company profits in the millions…all profit, for it was never due. Where are the brains of the average person? Can not anyone figure this out? So be it, but cut out the criticism of anyone who can, AND takes action as well. I laud anyone who does !!!
I do not think there is anything petty about it. My budget for food is 80.00 a month. so guess what I live on? Starkist tuna almost every other day. Especially when it is on sale for 77 cents a can. I thought it was my imagination at first. when you eat it as much as I do you notice when the can is barely over half full. Shame on starkist. People that can not afford to eat fish make due with starkist Tuna. I know how to make it 30 different ways,just to change the taste.
WE LOVE THE SOLID WHITE TUNA AT ALDI’S WE ALWAYS BOUGHT STARKIST TUNA TILL WE FOUND OUT ABOUT THE RECALLS I TRY TO EAT TUNA ABOUT 3 TIMES A WEEK AND ONE MY FAVORITE CASSEROLE IS TUNA NOODLE WITH CREAM OF CELERY SOUP. ALDI’S TUNA WE BUY IS MADE IN USA
no but they could fill more cans and make more profits off of our loss
They could also make the cans smaller and there would be less landfill garbage. But OH NO cannot do that then people would no they are getting less. As we all here know that the cans of tuna are same size with less product. There years ago used to be 6.5oz in a tuna can people! Ya check that out I am a consumer watcher and watched it all go down and no one saw it and there were no advocates on the consumer side back then. No computers online gab. Now there is. So here we all are.
Becca you are a moron if you think this is ok to do. If you pay to go to the show and if they removed portions of the sound would you be upset? Or no ending? How about filling your gas tank? Would that bother you if they started to take that? Or lets get down to it, would it be ok to remove that from a paycheck and just let your bosses keep it? Would that be acceptable too? So the priorities you speak of are in the right place. It seems that you may need to reevaluate yours. Or are you one of the 1% that just do not care? You stop it now, regardless of how minute it appears. If we let this continue then we will continually be stolen from by every company we encounter. And it is just that, theft. Maybe that term means something to you.
Ever heard of a company accidentally giving you more than you paid for? Me neither.
Are you serious? Deception should be warranted for intentional false advertising? Obviously, your priority is company profit and not consumer protection. That attitude is what makes capitalism smell worse than a can of rotten tuna.
BECCA! People with money don’t have priorities, they have monies!. >>> People that have a budget, watch pennies to make ends meet.
This is and has been an ongoing issue, Becca! Not only with Starkist, but with EVERY corporation that sells consumables! They’ve been pilfering the proportions from our foods for the last several decades AT LEAST!!!
Does anyone remember how large the smallest cans of tuna USED to be??? And do you, also remember that the product was tightly packed and reached all the way to the TOP of the can??? There was very little water or oil! Most of the can was the product itself! NOW…it’s mostly the “fillers” of water or oil. Notice how the bottoms of plastic jars are no longer flat??? How about how the tops of the containers are now designed to retain a good bit of the product so we can’t get every last drop!!!
Class Action Lawsuits like this one are something who’s time is WAY past due!!! We need to be MORE diligent in calling these crooks “on the carpet” about this deceptive form of thievery…instead of calling this sort of thing “petty”! What’s “petty” is their boldness to be stealing from people like this when their CEO’s are paid BILLIONS per year!!! >:-(
When you sell millions of cans of tuna, then the .12 ounces shortage adds up to thousands of pounds we were cheated out of….do the math….
We use Sunkist as our Tuna so definitely bought a lot of cans in the time frams.
Ya-you bought so many cans-then you would know its Starkist not Sunkist,thats an orange.
That was awesome lololol!
Have either of you heard of AUTO CORRECT? Sunkist is a word that can easily be changed from STARKIST. DUH!!! Oh and my spelling corrector tried to change Starkist as well as a misspelled word.
Touchy, judgemental Will.
lol. People are coming out of the woodwork now.
Omg this is my favorite tuna in all these years
Ate multiple cans of starkist tuna during that time
Obviously no however it does make an overall consumption adds up. The price is for the content which then is false advertising, if they get away with under filling their cans which are not product viewable, other companies will do the same and eventually they will be extracting huge profits by screwing buyers. Cheating should never win. Don’t file. Then you make a valid point. If you file now you will be a hypocrite.
Does anyone know when we see our cash or tuna? !
I was wondering the same thing…
Still waiting in Virginia. Maybe when all the water drowns the tuna and the lawyers come back from their vacations.
Yes. When the attorneys make there money. So the game will have to be played out as the other corporation ( Attorneys for Starkist) make their profit. >>>3 year statue of lijmitations.
Statue of limitations isn’t a factor because the claim was Filed. Claims already filed.
UPDATE 3: On Sept. 29, 2016, a California federal judge gave final approval to a revised $12 million class action settlement over allegations StarKist Co. underfilled cans of tuna, causing consumers to overpay for the product.
If there is a settlement now the law firm handling it will take more money from that settlement. Seems kind odd that they did not know this would happen if they changed the terms. Smells kind of fishy to me. Maybe they need to be investigated. To change the terms after the settlement was approved does not make sense. Thank goodness the judge has our backs. I think the law firm should get the original amount and anything after is on them. We should not have to suffer after we have already been messed over.
Fishy, lol sorry, couldn’t resist
My name is Mary Roberts I placed my claim for $25.00 still waiting for my payment. 467 west trinity Ave Clinton Indiana 47842
Dennis Roberts also filled a claim on this suit requested $50.00 in product still waiting also at above listed address
Mary, I read an article after the final release Sept 29 that said due to the number of claims filed the actual payout is only going to be a couple dollars (or less) per person. So you’ll probably still get something but don’t expect the $25 or $50 in coupons.
This bums me out. They posted it all over the news and because they dont require proof of purchase, people said they purchased when they didn’t. Now it screwed the people who actually eat the product.
They were probably flagged. Usually it’s 1 claim per address.
Mary, They were probably flagged. Usually it’s 1 claim per address.
why are you putting your address out there