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.
A New Jersey man has filed a slack-fill class action lawsuit accusing Tootsie Roll LLC of falsely advertising and selling its Junior Mints and Sugar Babies theater box candies.
Plaintiff Regan Iglesia says the company’s “slack-fill scam” fools consumers into buying “empty space at premium prices.”
Iglesia claims the defendant’s marketing of the candies was misleading because it represented the packages as being adequately filled when they actually contained quite a bit of slack-fill.
Slack-fill, according to the class action lawsuit, is the difference between a container’s actual capacity and the volume of product within that container.
“Nonfunctional slack-fill is the empty space in a package that is filled to less than its capacity for illegitimate or unlawful reasons,” Iglesias’ class action lawsuit states.
The only purpose of this slack-fill, the plaintiff argues, is to deceive consumers into buying the products over competitors’.
The deception harmed not only consumers, but also the company’s competitors, whose labeling was designed to reveal the true contents of the package, the slack-fill class action lawsuit says.
Iglesia says he purchased the products, specifically Junior Mints, within the last six years at an Albertsons in New Jersey.
He says he relied on the product packaging, which is opaque, when making his purchase, and took the box size and label to mean the candy inside would fill the box.
Had he known the size of the box did not indicate the amount of candy within, he either would not have purchased the Junior Mints or would have paid less.
The company, being involved with the manufacture and sale of the candy, knew or should have known its advertising of the products was false and misleading, the slack-fill class action lawsuit says.
“Defendant affirmatively misrepresented the amount of candy product contained in the Products’ boxes in order to convince the public and the Products’ consumers users to purchase the Products all to the financial damage and detriment of the Plaintiff and the consuming public,” the class action lawsuit says.
The deceptions resulted in greater profits for the company at the expense of consumers, Iglesias says.
The amount of product in a package is “material” to consumers in the market for that product, Iglesias says, adding consumers spend only 13 seconds, on average, deciding whether to purchase a product in the store.
According to the class action lawsuit, research has shown consumers are more likely to buy packages that seem larger. As such, Tootsie Roll chose box sizes for its products that convey to consumers they will be receiving a certain amount of candy.
The plaintiff retained two economics experts who conducted an experiment, including a survey of 3,788 consumers.
The results of that survey revealed nearly 90% of consumers who purchased candy overestimate the amount of candy the products’ packages contain.
The survey results also revealed the size of the product’s packaging influences consumers’ decision to make the purchase.
Based on the experts’ calculations, in their opinion, “the price premium for Juniors Mints was 26.0% while the price premium for Sugar Babies was 21.5% for the retail sales channel. For the movie theater sales channel, the price premia for Junior Mints and Sugar Babies was 16.4% and 13.4%, respectively.”
In addition, the plaintiff argues, slack-fill does nothing to protect the packages’ contents during shipping. On the contrary, more space in the packages allows the contents to move around, “making it more likely that the contents will break or sustain damage.”
The slack-fill class action lawsuit formally accuses Tootsie Roll of violating the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and of breach of express warranty, unjust enrichment, common law fraud, breach of implied warranty of merchantability, and negligent and intentional misrepresentation.
Iglesia seeks punitive and treble damages and pre- and post-judgment interest, restitution and disgorgement, attorneys’ fees, costs and any other relief the Court deems proper.
Have you ever purchased candy only to find the box had a lot of empty space? Tell us about it in the comment section below.
The plaintiff is represented by James C. Shah and Natalie Finkelman Bennett of Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah LLP; and Ryan J. Clarkson, Matthew T. Theriault, Bahar Sodaify and Zach Chrzan of Clarkson Law Firm PC.
The Junior Mints Slack-Fill Class Action Lawsuit is Regan Iglesia, et al. v. Tootsie Roll Industries LLC, Case No. 3:20-cv-18751, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:
1,771 thoughts onSugar Babies, Junior Mints Class Action Lawsuit Alleges Slack-Fill Scheme
I have purchased these products
YES I HAVE PURHASED A FEW BOXES FILLED WITH AIR. THIS IS WORST THAN A BAG OF CHIPS
Please add me. The shrinkage lately has been insulting.
Please add me
Add my name please.
Please add me THESE ARE MY FAVORIT CANDIES.