Ruffles Class Action Lawsuit Says Baked Chips Are Mislabeled

Frito-Lay faces a class action lawsuit alleging that their Cheddar & Sour Cream Baked Ruffles are misleadingly labeled.

Plaintiff Santina LaRocca argues that Frito-Lay’s Cheddar & Sour Cream Baked Ruffles are labeled in a way that fails to disclose the presence of artificial flavors. Consumers are allegedly misled by this labeling and deceived into paying a higher price for the products based on false advertising.

LaRocca notes that many consumers have started to look for food products free of artificial flavors, coloring, preservatives, and other additives in an attempt to lead a healthier lifestyle. These health-conscious consumers reportedly look for food products with natural, wholesome, and fresh ingredients.

According to the Ruffles class action lawsuit, several surveys have supported this trend. Nielson reportedly found that 62% of consumers try to avoid artificial flavoring. New Hope Network found that 71% of consumers try to avoid these ingredients while Label Insight found that 76% of consumers prefer to avoid artificial flavors.

As a part of this trend, consumers are allegedly seeking products which get their flavoring from their characterizing food ingredients. For example, they may look for strawberry shortcake with real strawberries instead of strawberry flavoring derived from cherries. Similarly, consumers may prefer vanilla ice cream made with real vanilla extract instead of artificial vanillin.

LaRocca notes that this preference for non-artificial flavors is particularly important in dairy products and food with dairy flavors because “consumers expect dairy products and flavors to contain minimal ingredients and be free from synthetic ingredients and harsh processing due to their association with cows and milk.”

Cheddar & Sour Cream Baked Ruffles allegedly fail to follow these consumer trends. LaRocca’s Ruffles class action lawsuit claims that these products contain “artificial flavoring” as indicated by the ingredients list. In fact, the products reportedly contain artificial diacetyl– the main flavor component in sour cream. LaRocca argues that this ingredient aims to mimic or reinforce the flavor of sour cream in the chips.

Unfortunately, Frito-Lay allegedly fails to disclose the presence of artificial flavoring on the front of the packaging. LaRocca argues that the packaging should read “Cheddar and ‘Artificial Sour Cream Flavored’” or some other verbiage which would disclose the presence of artificial flavoring.

Instead of clearly disclosing the presence of artificial flavoring, the Cheddar and Sour Cream Baked Ruffles packaging reportedly only says “flavored” in smaller print below the flavor listing.

“Reasonable consumers do not expect a product which only uses the term ‘flavored’ to contain artificial flavors, because they would expect the company to tell the whole truth, instead of a half-truth,” the Ruffles class action lawsuit contends.

The plaintiff argues that she and other consumers were deceived by Frito-Lay’s packaging. As a result, they were allegedly tricked into paying a higher price for the products or making purchases they otherwise would not have based on false representations.

LaRocca seeks to represent a Class of New York consumers who purchased Ruffles Baked Cheddar & Sour Cream chips. On behalf of herself and the proposed Class, LaRocca seeks monetary damages, restitution, disgorgement, interest, court costs, and attorneys’ fees.

This is not the first time Frito-Lay has faced legal action over their products nor is it the first time the company’s Ruffles products have come under fire.

In April, another consumer filed a class action lawsuit against the company arguing that regular, non-baked Cheddar & Sour Cream chips are artificially flavored. Like LaRocca, this plaintiff claimed that Ruffles packaging fails to disclose the presence of artificial flavoring in violation of state and federal laws.

In July, Frito-Lay asked for the case against them to be dismissed. The company argued that the plaintiff failed to provide enough information to support her claims that Ruffles chips are misleadingly labeled. Without factual support of her claims, Frito-Lay says the Ruffles class action lawsuit should fail.

Frito-Lay has previously faced legal action alleging that they misleadingly labeled several of their products as “made with natural ingredients.” Allegedly, the products contained genetically modified organisms or GMOs in contrast to these labeling statements. In 2017, Frito-Lay agreed to a settlement to resolve these claims in which the company removed the “all natural” claims on their packaging.

Have you purchased Ruffles chips under the assumption that they didn’t contain artificial flavors or colors? Share your experiences in the comment section below.

LaRocca and the proposed Class are represented by Spencer Sheehan of Sheehan & Associated PC.

The Ruffles Class Action Lawsuit is Santina LaRocca v. Frito-Lay Inc., Case No. 1:20-cv-04245, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

Appeals Court OKs Felon Voting Rights Restrictions In Florida Class Action Lawsuit

California Lawmakers Want More Information on Uber Sexual Assault Reports

Indoor Mall Retailers Take Legal Action Against L.A. County to Re-Open

Why Is There a Recall on Zantac?