Harris Teeter class action alleges cereal bars falsely advertised as naturally flavored

Harris Teeter class action lawsuit overview:

• Who: Plaintiff Ellen Zwilling filed a class action lawsuit against Harris Teeter LLC.
• Why: Harris Teeter allegedly falsely advertises its cereal bars as naturally flavored even though the product allegedly contains a synthetic flavoring ingredient.
• Where: The Harris Teeter lawsuit was filed in North Carolina federal court.

A new class action lawsuit alleges that Harris Teeter cereal bars are falsely advertised as naturally flavored even though they include a synthetic flavoring ingredient.

Plaintiff Ellen Zwilling filed the lawsuit in North Carolina federal court. She says she attempts to buy “clean” food for her family and decided to purchase the cereal bars after reading the prominent claim they are “Naturally Flavored With Other Natural Flavors” together with images of fruit.

The Harris Teeter class action lawsuit alleges the “natural” claims are misleading because the cereal bars contain a synthetic form of malic acid as flavoring.

This synthetic version of malic acid is reportedly derived from a petroleum substrate and other synthetic compounds.

Zwilling’s lawyers commissioned an independent food testing laboratory to analyze the cereal bars. The testing revealed the product contained the synthetic version of malic acid (DL malic acid) and not the natural L malic acid.

Harris Teeter cereal bars unlawfully fail to disclose artificial flavors, plaintiff claims

According to the complaint, federal regulations incorporated as North Carolina law state explicitly: “DL malic acid does not occur naturally.”

“If a food product’s characterizing flavor is not created exclusively by the named flavor ingredient, the product’s front label must state that the product’s flavor was simulated or reinforced with either natural or artificial flavorings or both,” the Harris Teeter lawsuit says.

The front label does not indicate the product is “artificially flavored” even though it actually does contain artificial flavoring, Zwilling says.

She says she understood the lack of an “artificially flavored” disclosure to mean the product contained only natural flavors.

“Those representations were false,” she says in the complaint. Zwillling says she paid a premium for the product based on false advertising.

Zwilling filed the Harris Teeter lawsuit on behalf of herself and a proposed nationwide class of consumers who purchased the allegedly mislabeled cereal bars in the last four years.

She asserts claims for violations of the North Carolina Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act, breach of express warranty and unjust enrichment.

Food Lion was recently hit with a similar class action lawsuit alleging it misleads consumers about the “natural” quality of its cereal bars.

Have you purchased Harris Teeter cereal bars? Tell us what you think of the allegations they are falsely advertised as “natural.”

Zwilling is represented by Inez de Ondarza Simmons of De Ondarza Simmons PLLC and Charles C. Weller of Charles C. Weller APC.

The Harris Teeter class action lawsuit is Ellen Zwilling v. Harris Teeter LLC, Case No. 3:24-cv-00917, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, Charlotte Division.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• $3.9M Albertsons settlement resolves overcharging claims
• Coca-Cola recalls 13K+ packs of mislabeled Minute Maid lemonade
• Eggland’s Best asks judge to dismiss cage-free eggs class action
• Judge trims claims in Fresca false advertising class action