Trader Joe’s Class Action Deal Approved at $1.3M

A judge has given preliminary approval to a $1.3 million settlement that would end consumers claims that Trader Joe’s tuna cans are underfilled.

The Trader Joe’s tuna class action settlement was approved by U.S. District Judge Otis D. Wright II in California.

The settlement deal had previously been rejected, but the judge changed this decision based on a precedent set by a different case.

Under the terms of the settlement, Trader Joe’s will create a settlement fund of $1.3 million, of which one-third will go to the customers’ attorneys, $357,953 will go to administrative costs, and the named plaintiff will receive up to $5,000.

Out of the remaining funds, each Class Members who makes a valid claim for benefits will receive around $29, depending on the number of claims that re-submitted, dictates the settlement.

If there are remaining funds, the settlement agreement stipulates that these funds will be donated to Feeding America, a nationwide food bank charity.

The approval decision also lays out instructions for how Class Members are to be informed of their rights under the settlement. Reportedly, a website and toll-free phone number will be established to help inform consumers about the settlement. Additionally, an internet ad campaign and print ads in various publications will be sent out, which are anticipated to reach around 70 percent of Class Members. 

In approving the Trader Joe’s settlement, Judge Wright also determined that the proposed class of individuals should be approved.

Judge Wright’s approval of the settlement is a reversal of his previous decision to reject the settlement because it did not meet a predominance requirement.

Previously, the settlement had been rejected because the plaintiff attempted to apply California law to a nationwide class.

According to the judge, this was necessary because a decision made in a previous case against Honda Motor Company had stipulated that “California law may only be used on a class-wide basis if the interests of other states are not found to outweigh California’s interest in having its law applied.”

However, that determination in the Honda Motor Company case was reversed, and so the Ninth Circuit determined that like in the Honda case, consumers in the Trader Joe’s class action lawsuit could apply California law as no party had challenged the application of California law to a nationwide class.

The judge determined that the Class Members in question had indeed suffered what were allegedly similar injuries, as they had purchased tuna that they believed to contain more food. 

This Trader Joe’s tuna class action settlement resolves several Trader Joe’s tuna class action lawsuits filed in Illinois, New York, and California. Consumers in these tuna can class action lawsuits claimed that Trader Joe’s underfilled its 5-ounce cans of tuna, violating guidelines set forth by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Have you felt that Trader Joe’s branded foods were underfilled? Share your thoughts in the comment section below.

Class Members are represented by L. Timothy Fisher and Scott A. Bursor of Bursor & Fisher PA.

The Trader Joe’s Tuna Can Multidistrict Litigation is In re: Trader Joe’s Tuna Litigation, Case No. 2:16-cv-01371, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. 

Read More Lawsuit & Settlement News:

Dollar General Class Action Alleges Discrimination Against Pregnant Workers

P.F. Chang’s Fake Crab Class Action Gets Tossed

Lawsuit Alleges Diabetes Drugs Caused Fournier’s Gangrene

Ford Class Action Alleges Transmission Defect