Starbucks Wins Underfilled Latte 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.

A judge has ruled in favor of Starbucks Corporation, in response to a class action lawsuit alleging that the popular coffee chain underfills its lattes.

Plaintiffs Siera Strumlauf, Benjamin Robles, and Brittany Crittenden brought forward their class action lawsuit in March 2016. The case has experienced a number of developments since then.

After Starbucks made a motion to dismiss the Starbucks underfilled lattes class action lawsuit, it was permitted to continue in June 2016, but with fewer than the original number of claims. Now, a judge has ruled in favor of Starbucks.

Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers determined that plaintiffs Strumlauf, Robles, and Crittenden didn’t do enough to prove that Starbucks intentionally underfills its lattes.

“Each of plaintiffs’ causes of action requires, at minimum, a false statement or misrepresentation. Plaintiffs’ failure to establish such a statement or representation is fatal to each of their eight claims,” the judge wrote in her ruling.

Strumlauf and others brought forward three main arguments showing that Starbucks underfills its lattes:

• The capacity of Starbucks’ cups is exactly the “Promised Beverage Volume,” so the liquid inside must be less than that amount unless the cup were to be filled to the brim.
• Milk foam in a latte does not count toward the volume of a latte.
• Starbucks recipe cards and employee instructions specify ingredient quantities that produce less than the “Promised Beverage Volume.”

Judge Gonzalez Rogers’ decision pokes holes in each of these assertions. She notes that Strumlauf and others have invalidated their own claim that the Starbucks cups hold “exactly” the amount advertised.

They brought in the expert opinion of Carol T. Hockert, former Division Chief at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, Office of Weights and Measures, who outlines the percentage at which lattes are underfilled.

However, Hockert’s own analysis shows that the capacity of the cups is 14.5 fl. oz. for a Tall, 18.5 for a Grande, and 22.8 for a Venti — measurements over the “Promised Beverage Volume.”

The judge goes on to note that though the Starbucks latte class action lawsuit claims that milk foam does not count towards the volume of a latte, the plaintiffs agree that a latte is composed of espresso, steamed milk, and milk foam. She argues that this invalidates their own argument.

Lastly, though Strumlauf and others claim that the employee instructions incorporate ingredients in quantities insufficient to produce drinks of the advertised amounts, the judge argues that the Starbucks class action lawsuit failed to take into account that milk expands when steamed and aerated, a process necessary to create a latte.

Judge Gonzalez Rogers notes that when the milk is steamed an aerated, the ingredients do combine to make a drink of the advertised amount.

Strumlauf, Robles, and Crittenden are represented by Scott A. Bursor, Joseph I. Marchese, Neal J. Deckant and L. Timothy Fisher of Bursor & Fisher PA, Gerald Healy and John Hafemann of Military Justice Attorneys PLLC and Brittany Weiner of Imbesi Law PC.

The Starbucks Underfilled Latte Class Action Lawsuit is Strumlauf, et al. v. Starbucks Corp., Case No. 4:16-cv-01306-YGR, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.