Polaner class action over spread false advertising should remain on docket, woman argues

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.

Update: 

• A fruit spread consumer defended her claims that Polaner jellies mislead consumers by stating the products are “All Fruit” as they actually contain citric acid and “natural flavors.” 
• Plaintiff Deena Indiviglio filed a memo April 3 in a New York federal court, doubling down on her claims against Polaner manufacturer B&G Foods Inc. 
• In her memo, she argues the class action lawsuit should proceed so the court can determine whether the phrase “all fruit” is synonymous with “nothing but or only” fruit, as she claims.
• According to the lawsuit, the company’s “All Fruit” jellies mislead consumers because the ingredient list on the back of the jars includes citric acid and natural flavors.
• Meanwhile, B&G filed a motion to dismiss, arguing “nothing in [Indiviglio’s] allegations state … that the all fruit label is actually false or misleading.”

Polaner spreads class action overview: 

• Who: A New York woman is suing Polaner parent company B&G Foods Inc.
• Why: The plaintiff says the company misleads consumers when it says its spreads are “All Fruit,” as they also contain citric acid.
• Where: The Polaner spreads class action lawsuit was filed in a New York federal court.

(March 30, 2023)

Polaner jellies mislead consumers by stating that the products are “All Fruit” as they actually contain citric acid and “natural flavors,” a class lawsuit alleges.

Plaintiff Deena Indiviglio filed the class action lawsuit against Polaner manufacturer B&G Foods Inc. in November 2022 in a New York federal court, alleging violations of state and federal consumer laws and false advertising. 

According to her lawsuit, the company’s “All Fruit” jellies mislead consumers because the ingredient list on the back of the jars includes citric acid and natural flavors.

The phrase “all fruit” is synonymous with “nothing but or only” fruit, she claims.

While citric acid is found in fruit, Indiviglio claims it is often produced in a laboratory through the cultivation of fungus, a cheaper method than extracting it naturally, the lawsuit alleges. 

B&G Foods moves to have the case dismissed

On March 20, the company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, arguing that while Indiviglio speaks to the food industry’s use of “citric acid” and “natural flavors” as ingredients, she does not make specific claims about the ingredients in Polaner jams.

“Plaintiff’s complaint fails to allege any facts supporting her claim that Polaner All Fruit is not made from fruit,” the company says.

“Indeed, she admits that the three primary ingredients in the product are fruit. And as to the citric acid and natural flavor ingredients, she makes allegations only about the food industry generally, which is insufficient to overcome a motion to dismiss.”

The company also claims Indiviglio is a “serial litigant,” citing several other lawsuits.

In other jam-related news, Firehouse Jams recalled more than 700 pounds of bacon marmalade because the products didn’t go through the legally required inspection process.

What do you think of the allegations in this case about Polaner jams? Let us know in the comments.

Indiviglio is represented by Spencer Sheehan of Sheehan & Associates PC. 

The Polaner jelly spreads class action lawsuit is Deena Indiviglio, et al. v. B&G Foods Inc., Case No. 7:22-cv-09545, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Tupperware class action alleges company made false, misleading statements in 2020 annual report
• Stride Rite class action claims company engages in aggressive unsolicited marketing
• Olly seeks to trim injury claim from melatonin class action
• Xtra detergent class action claims company falsely advertises bottle as usable for 116 loads