Fage Greek Yogurt Class Action Lawsuit Survives Dismissal Bid

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.

A New York federal judge refused to dismiss in its entirety a class action lawsuit alleging Fage Greek Yogurt includes a deceptive “Total 0%” phrase on its label.

However, the judge did throw out a negligent misrepresentation claim and a claim for injunctive relief.

The plaintiffs assert in the Fage yogurt class action lawsuit that the “Total 0%” phrase suggests to consumers that the Greek yogurt product contains no sugar, calories or carbs, and fails to make it clear that the phrase refers only to fat content.

U.S. District Judge Margo K. Brodie found that the plaintiffs’ allegations were adequate to bring claims under the California Unfair Competition Law and Consumer Legal Remedies Act.

However, she found that the allegations were not sufficient to support their negligent misrepresentation claim.

The plaintiffs allege they were deceived by the “Total 0%” language because competing yogurt products use “0%” claims but make it clear that the claim refers only to the yogurt’s fat content.

According to the Fage yogurt class action lawsuit, the manufacturer has an unfair advantage over its competitors by not making it clear that the “Total 0%” language only applies to fat content and not sugar, calories or carbohydrates.

According to the Fage Greek yogurt class action lawsuit, the plaintiffs contend they relied on the “Total 0%” language when deciding to purchase the product because they believed the “Total 0%” referred to the amount of sugar, calories, carbohydrates and sodium contained in the product.

They claim that they were deceived by the label and would not have purchased the product if they knew that “Total 0%” referred only to the fat content.

“As a result of Defendant’s failure to clarify what the ‘0%’ refers to, reasonable consumers like Plaintiffs are left to impute meaning to the prominent ‘0%’ on the package of the Total 0% Products,” Judge Brodie writes. “Plaintiffs also allege that because the ‘0%’ is preceded by the word ‘Total,’ a reasonable consumer is likely to believe that the Total 0% Products contain no fat, sugar, sodium, cholesterol, carbohydrates, calories, or any other item required to be disclosed on the Total 0% Products’ packaging.”

Judge Brodie found that these allegations were sufficient to bring the consumer protection claims under California’s Unfair Competition Law and Consumer Legal Remedies Act.

However, she found that they fall short of justifying a claim for injunctive relief because the plaintiffs did not assert that they were at risk of future injury from the allegedly deceptively labeled Fage Greek yogurt products.

The judge also found that the negligent misrepresentation claims under the laws of several states could not stand because the plaintiffs’ claims were incorrectly premised on an alleged omission, and because the plaintiffs did not allege they had a fiduciary relationship with the Fage manufacturer.

The plaintiffs are represented by C.K. Lee of Lee Litigation Group PLLC.

The Fage Greek Yogurt Class Action Lawsuit is Stoltz, et al. v. Fage Dairy Procesing SA, et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-03826, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.