Lorna Doone Butter Class Action Lawsuit Overview:
- Who: Plaintiff Zilphia Howze has filed a class action lawsuit against Mondelēz Global LLC.
- Why: Howze alleges Lorna Doone shortbread cookies are not made with butter despite the expectation from consumers that shortbread products contain butter.
- Where: The Lorna Doone class action lawsuit was filed in New York federal court.
Mondelēz Global LLC makes Lorna Doone shortbread cookies without the butter ingredient that consumers expect, according to a class action lawsuit filed May 11 in New York federal court.
Shortbread was invented in Scotland centuries ago, according to the Lorna Doone class action lawsuit. The shortbread name is derived from its short (crumbly) structure, which is a result of a high proportion of fat that inhibits gluten and allows the dough to rise.
Baked goods labeled as shortbread have three primary ingredients: sugar, butter and wheat flour. The Lorna Doone class action lawsuit points to several dictionary definitions of shortbread, all of which state that butter is a primary ingredient.
Lorna Doone Class Action Says Consumers Expect Shortbread Cookies to Contain Butter
Plaintiff Zilphia Howze says that consumers expect foods identified as shortbread to contain butter. However, Lorna Doone shortbread cookies do not contain any butter. Instead, they contain vegetable shortening in the form of canola oil and palm oil, according to the class action lawsuit.
“The result of substituting vegetable oils for butter is that the Product lacks the nutritional, organoleptic and sensory attributes of shortbread,” Howze alleges.
To create the buttery taste, Mondelēz allegedly uses artificial flavoring to imitate the flavor of butter.
Howze points to the front label of the Lorna Doone package, which describes the product as a “Shortbread Cookie” not a “Shortbread-Flavored Cookie” or “Shortbread-Style Cookie.” Based on this labeling, consumers would assume the Lorna Doone cookies are made with butter and would not be likely to double-check the ingredients list, she says.
Other brands of shortbread cookies contain butter as an ingredient even if it is not the exclusive shortening ingredient, the Lorna Doone class action lawsuit asserts.
“Consumers expect shortbread cookies, especially where the labeling invokes Scottish themes, through the Lorna Doone name and plaid packaging to contain butter,” Howze says in the lawsuit.
She filed the class action lawsuit on behalf of herself and others who purchased Lorna Doone shortbread cookies in New York, Rhode Island, Texas, New Mexico, Maine and Louisiana.
The Lorna Doone class action lawsuit asserts claims for violations of state consumer protection laws, consumer fraud acts, breach of express warranty, negligent misrepresentation, fraud and unjust enrichment.
A consumer filed a similar Lorna Doone class action lawsuit last fall in Illinois.
What do you think of the allegations that Lorna Doone shortbread cookies do not contain butter? Join the discussion in the comments below!
The Lorna Doone Cookies Butter Class Action Lawsuit is Zilphia Howze, et al. v. Mondelz Global LLC, Case No. 1:22-cv-00351, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York.
Don’t Miss Out!
Check out our list of Class Action Lawsuits and Class Action Settlements you may qualify to join!
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:
1,349 thoughts onLorna Doone Class Action Alleges Cookies Not Made With Butter
add me
My family eats Lorna Doone and will continue to eat them our baby loves the flavor
I literally buy these in bulk from Sam’s club and Walmart. Please add me
By them all the time..Please add me..
Again someone making a company responsible for their non reading skills. Ingredients are printed on the package for a reason. They are not listed just to fill empty space on a box. In Europe, this kind of lawsuit would make it straight in the the trash bin. There is a reason she filed it without a lawyer, because no lawyer would touch this suit. Remember the lawsuit about the chemicals in La Croix water? Anyone know the outcome? Here it is:
Dismissal with prejudice and complete retraction.”
Which in laymen’s terms means, the court said it’s a bogus suit, told the plaintiff to drop it, and not to refile, as the courts can’t be bothered, and won’t entertain it. Same will happen here, but the state thanks you for the filing fees. Same thing will happen with the class action suit against Klarna. One doesn’t get to sue because of their refusal to read an ingredients list, nor read the fine print of the Terms and Conditions of a “contract”. Some more examples:
Use fb/IG/Twitter etc? Did you read the T&C’s? Probably not. You don’t get to sue them because they deleted a post, suspended your page, or banned you all together. If you ask why not, you didn’t read the fine print before you clicked on “I ACCEPT”.
Got kicked off a flight because of what you’re wearing? You don’t get to sue the airline over it, as their Conditions of Carriage states that they can ask you to deplane for wearing something the airline or someone else on the flight might find offensive. It is at the airlines discretion to ask you to change, or boot you from the flight all together.
To make a long story short:
READ EVERYTHING BEFORE YOU BUY SOMETHING, OR CLICK ON “I ACCEPT”.
Please add me!
Add me
oh no!! Please add me – a staple for our house
Just finished a box on 5/13/2022. Please add me.
Omg those are my favorite defy I’m in please
Please add me as I have bought these cookies many times!!!