Class Certified in Chipotle GMO Class Action Lawsuit

Plaintiffs in a Chipotle class action lawsuit have been granted class certification, allowing them to move forward with claims that the popular restaurant falsely advertises their food as “non-GMO.”

U.S. District Judge Haywood S. Gilliam Jr. recently granted class certification to three classes of Chipotle consumers in California, Maryland, and New York. Judge Gilliam found that the named plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit adequately represent the Class, despite Chipotle’s arguments.  He wrote that the named plaintiffs successfully established that the proposed Classes would cover enough Class Members and that they sufficiently alleged common law issues to show they were deceived by Chipotle’s advertising.

The Chipotle class action lawsuit claims that the popular restaurant falsely advertises their ingredients as “non-GMO”, when their meat and dairy products allegedly come from animals which eat food which has been genetically modified.

Judge Gilliam also rejected Chipotle’s claims that the Class Member’s experiences were too different to certify a Class, finding that the alleged harm was common among Class representatives. The alleged harm includes purchasing food they otherwise wouldn’t have and paying more than they would had they known the food was falsely advertised.

The court also denied Chipotle’s motion for summary judgement, denying the company’s claims that the named plaintiffs were already customers. Judge Gilliam wrote that a question exists as to whether the plaintiffs would have purchased the food had they known the truth about the GMO ingredients, including meat and dairy products, regardless of if they had eaten at the popular restaurant in the past.

The ruling also overturned a previous ruling which had dismissed plaintiffs’ claim for injunctive relief for lack of standing. The former court ruled that injunctive relief could not be granted since deceived consumers were unlikely to repurchase the products again.

However, Judge Gilliam overturned the former court’s ruling – citing Davidson v. Kimberly-Clark Corp. This ruling, said Judge Gilliam, established that knowledge of past deceit does not ensure knowledge of future deceit. He further noted that, in their complaint, the plaintiffs mentioned their continued interest in eating at Chipotle so they may have believde that policies had changed.

Chiptle argued against the restoration of injunctive relief claims, saying that it was pointless because they had already pulled non-GMO advertisements and included disclaimers on their website. However, Judge Gilliam ruled that the changes made to their advertising does not ensure that consumers will be able to rely on the company’s representations in the future.

“Plaintiffs have believed strongly from the outset that Chipotle’s ‘non­GMO’ campaign was false and misleading,” said class counsel in an email, according to a Law360 report. “The affected consumers in California, Maryland and New York will now have the opportunity to prove their claims at trial.”

Plaintiffs are represented by Laurence D. King, Linda M. Fong, Matthew B. George, Mario M. Choi, Frederic S. Fox and Donald R. Hall of Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP.

The Chipotle GMO Class Action Lawsuit is Schneider et al. v. Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc., Case No. 4:16­cv­02200, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

UPDATE: On Sept. 11, 2019, a $6.5 million settlement was reached between Chipotle Mexican Grill and customers who claimed that the restaurant’s “non-GMO” advertisements and campaigns were misleading.

UPDATE 2: September 2019, the Chipotle non-GMO class action settlement website is now active. Click here for more information. 

UPDATE 3: On Feb. 4, 2020, a judge granted preliminary approval of a settlement between Chipotle and its customers, ending claims that the chain restaurant falsely advertised its food as “GMO free.”