Judge Rules Campbell’s Soup Class Action Lawsuit Can Proceed

A federal judge recently ruled that a class action lawsuit over Campbell’s soup may move forward, despite the company’s arguments for dismissal.

U.S. District Chief Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel rejected Campbell Soup Co.’s assertion that the class action lawsuit claims were preempted by federal law.

However, the judge did point out certain deficiencies in the case’s artificial-flavoring claims — although they were not enough to warrant dismissal.

Plaintiffs Danielle Schwartz and Haunah Vanlaningham challenge Campbell’s soup labeling. Allegedly, the soup products are misleadingly labeled as containing no preservatives despite the presence of these ingredients in the soups.

Campbell Soup Co. filed a motion to dismiss the claims, arguing that the plaintiff’s allegations were preempted by the federal Meat Inspection Act and Poultry Products Inspection Act. These laws allow the U.S. Department of Agriculture to impose labeling standards for meat and poultry products.

According to Campbell, this authority extends to its soup products so consistency and transparency is maintained for labeling under federal law.

However, Judge Rosenstengel rejected this argument, noting none of the soups included in the Campbell’s soup class action lawsuit contain meat or poultry ingredients. The manufacturer also failed to persuade the Court that the federal labeling laws should be extended, the judge’s motion says.

“Congress’s purpose in passing the FMIA and PPIA was not to create uniformity in all food labeling, however, but rather across meat and poultry products, and there is no indication that it was Congress’s intent to push states out of the business of regulating food labelling in general,” Judge Rosenstengel wrote.

Campbell had also argued the plaintiff’s claims were insufficient and failed to show how reasonable consumers would be mislead by Campbell’s soup packaging.

According to the company, the ingredients list on the soups’ back label would allow reasonable consumers to make an informed purchase. Judge Rosenstengel disagreed, saying there aren’t any significant issues with the plaintiffs’ allegations that would justify dismissal.

Although the Court denied Campbell’s motion for dismissal, Judge Rosenstengel noted there may be some issues with the plaintiffs’ claims surrounding artificial flavoring.

The plaintiffs reportedly failed to allege that they viewed representations about artificial flavors before purchasing the products. As such, the claims fail to satisfy the requirement for proximate cause under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act.

Judge Rosenstengel goes on to reject arguments to dismiss the plaintiffs’ claims for unjust enrichment and breach of warranty. Campbell Soup Co. had argued these claims should be dismissed since the plaintiffs’ artificial flavors claims fail under Illinois law.

However, since the Court did not dismiss those claims, the judge allowed them to continue.

Finally, Judge Rosenstengel said the Court would not challenge the plaintiffs’ standing for injunctive relief at this time based on the relief sought in the Campbell’s soup class action lawsuit.

However, because these claims are tied in with the those surrounding preservatives, Judge Rosenstengel ruled they cannot be dismissed at this time. The Court noted the plaintiffs can amend these allegations if they wish to beef up their argument about artificial flavors.

Schwartz and Vanlaningham filed their class action lawsuit in August 2018, alleging that Campbell’s soup is misleadingly marketed as “Made With Patience, Not Preservatives,” or “No Preservatives Added.” Despite these representations, Campbell’s soup allegedly contains preservatives such as citric acid, ascorbic acid and succinic acid.

“Because the Soups contain the Preservatives, the representations that the Soups contain no preservatives are unfair, false, deceptive, and misleading,” the Campbell Soup class action lawsuit alleges.

“By claiming that the Soups are free of preservatives, Defendant deceives consumers into believing that the Soups do not contain preservatives, when they in fact contain the Preservatives.”

According to the plaintiffs, they and other consumers were misled by this packaging and were even forced to pay a higher price for the products.

Consumers are allegedly willing to pay a higher price for preservative-free products. Unfortunately, when it comes to Campbell’s soup, shoppers are deceived into paying a higher price for no reason, the plaintiffs say.

Did you purchase Campbell’s soup thinking it did not contain preservatives or artificial flavors? Share your thoughts in the comment section below.

Plaintiffs and the proposed Class are represented by David C. Nelson of Nelson & Nelson Attorneys at Law PC, Matthew H. Armstrong of Armstrong Law Firm LLC and Stuart L. Cochran of Steckler Gresham Cochran PLLC.

The Campbell’s Soup Preservatives Class Action Lawsuit is Schwartz, et al. v. Campbell Soup Co., Case No. 3:20-cv-00647, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

Steaz Tea Deceives With Added Sugars Labeling: Class Action Lawsuit

Kona Beer, Califia Creamer Class Action Settlement Checks Mailed

Does Zantac Cause Cancer?

Uber Sexual Assault, Lyft Driver Rideshare App Lawsuit Investigation