Drizzilicious Snacks Don’t Contain Real White Chocolate, Class Action Says

A recent class action lawsuit claims that Drizzilicious snacks do not contain real white chocolate as advertised on product labels.

Drizzilicious Cinnamon Swirl and Drizzilicious Birthday Cake are reportedly marketed as being “drizzled with white chocolate” or adorned with “white chocolaty drizzle.”

These label representations allegedly imply that the products contain white chocolate.

However, plaintiff Aurora Morrison claims that these representations are false as Drizzilicious snacks contain imitation flavoring.

“Neither of the products contain white chocolate,” Morrison claims in her Drizzilicious class action lawsuit. “Through these advertised claims, the products misrepresent their contents to consumer by blatant falsehoods, misleading suggestions, and lies of omission.”

True white chocolate contains cocoa butter, dairy ingredients, and sweetener. Regulations set forth by U.S. authorities only allow white chocolate to be sold if it includes at least 20 percent cocoa butter and 3.5 percent milk fat by weight. Similar regulations are reportedly in place in Canada and Europe as well.

Regulations by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) require that businesses clearly brand and label their foods to reflect the contents.

According to the FDA, a food is misbranded if “it is an imitation of another food, unless its label bears, in type of uniform size and prominence, the word ‘imitation’ and, immediately thereafter, the name of the food imitated.”

The FDA reportedly notes that products can be misbranded regardless of whether or not businesses intend to mislead their customers.

The Drizzilicious class action lawsuit claims that the labeling on Drizzilicious Cinnamon Swirl and Drizzilicious Birthday Cake products misleads consumers and makes them believe that the products contain real white chocolate.

However, because the products contain imitation white chocolate, consumers reportedly do not get their money’s worth when purchasing the product.

“FDA rules concerning white chocolate are not obscure regulations of no concern to anyone but the regulators. On the contrary, consumers rely on these regulations to assure that they are purchasing what they are led to believe they are purchasing,” Morrison argues.

“Since white chocolate does not contain the cacao solids that impart chocolate with its flavor and which consumers normally associate with chocolate, consumers rely on the FDA to assure that white chocolate more closely resembles what they know as chocolate.”

The Drizzilicious class action lawsuit brings claims of common law fraud as well as violations of New York’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act and False Advertising Law.

Morrison seeks to represent a Class of consumers who purchased Drizzilicious Cinnamon Swirl or Drizzilicious Birthday Cake with potential subclasses that the court deems appropriate.

If the court finds that she is unable to represent a nationwide Class, Morrison proposes an alternative Class of consumers who purchased Drizzilicious Cinnamon Swirl or Drizzilicious Birthday Cake in New York.

The Drizzilicious class action lawsuit seeks restitution, disgorgement, compensatory damages, actual damages, statutory damages, court costs, and attorneys’ fees.

Morrison and the proposed Class are represented by C.K. Lee and Anne Seeling of Lee Litigation Group PLLC.

The Drizzilicious White Chocolate Snacks Class Action Lawsuit is Morrison v. Snack Innovations Inc., Case No. 1:19-cv-01238, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.