Campbell Soup Evades ‘Healthy’ False Ad Class Action Lawsuit

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.

Campbell Soup has won dismissal of claims that it falsely labeled some of its soup products as “healthy.”

U.S. District Judge Robert T. Benitez granted a motion for dismissal filed by defendant Campbell Soup Co., finding that the plaintiffs’ claims of false and misleading labeling are preempted.

The judge determined that plaintiffs’ allegations would impose impermissible labeling requirements over and above those already required by federal law.

Plaintiff Harold Brower filed this Campbell Soup class action lawsuit in April 2016. Brower claimed Campbell’s Healthy Request Chunky Grilled Chicken & Sausage Gumbo can’t be truthfully labeled as “healthy” when it in fact contains unhealthy trans fat in the form of partially hydrogenated soybean oil.

Brower also challenged the product’s certification by the American Heart Association. He found out later that this certification was a paid endorsement. Brower argued that Campbell Soup failed to disclose the nature of this endorsement as required under a USDA policy.

Brower claimed this labeling misleads consumers into paying a premium for Campbell Soup products, without getting the healthy food they’ve been reasonably led to expect. He raised claims under California’s Unfair Competition Law, False Advertising Law, and Consumer Legal Remedies Act. He also raised claims for breach of warranty under California law.

In June 2016, Brower’s claims were consolidated with a similar false advertising class action lawsuit brought by plaintiff Melinda Ferguson.

Campbell Soup filed the current motion to dismiss in August 2016. The company argued that since the labeling at issue had passed muster under a federal regulatory approval process, it was not subject to the plaintiffs’ claims raised under California consumer protection laws.

The USDA reviews the labeling of certain food products, applying requirements of the Poultry Products Inspection Act and the Federal Meat Inspection Act. Both those laws expressly preempt any attempt by a state to impose labeling requirements “in addition to, or different than” those required by federal law.

To the extent plaintiffs’ claims fall under any of these applicable federal laws, the company argued, they are precluded since the USDA has already evaluated the subject labeling and found it to be in compliance with those requirements.

Campbell Soup further argued that the USDA review process already takes into consideration whether the subject label could be false or misleading.

Campbell Soup accused plaintiffs’ counsel Jack Fitzgerald of filing a frivolous lawsuit, since the claims raised are preempted by federal law. The company sought sanctions against Fitzgerald in the form of a $25,000 attorney fee award for the company and a $60,000 penalty to be paid to the court.

The plaintiffs countered that their claims are not frivolous since they’re backed by applicable case law. They filed their own motion for sanctions against Campbell Soup’s counsel, accusing them of filing a frivolous motion for sanctions.

The plaintiffs are represented by Paul K. Joseph of the Law Office of Paul K. Joseph PC and Jack Fitzgerald, Trevor M. Flynn and Melanie Persinger of the Law Office of Jack Fitzgerald PC.

The Campbell’s Healthy Request Soup Class Action Lawsuit is Harold Brower and Melinda Ferguson v. Campbell Soup Co., Case No. 3:16-cv-01005, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.