Campbell Soup Class Action Says ‘No Preservatives’ Claim is Misleading

UPDATE: On Oct. 5, 2020, a federal judge ruled that a class action lawsuit over Campbell’s soup may move forward, despite the company’s arguments for dismissal.

A class action lawsuit alleging that the Campbell Soup Company tricks consumers into thinking various types of its soups are made without preservatives has been removed to federal court.

Lead plaintiffs, Danielle Schwartz and Haunah Vanlaningham, claim in the Campbell Soup class action lawsuit that the packaging on certain types of soups state that the products are “Made With Patience, Not Preservatives,” or even “No Preservatives Added.”

However, say the plaintiffs, the soups actually contain known preservatives, such as citric acid, ascorbic acid, and succinic acid.

In the Campbell Soup class action lawsuit, the plaintiffs each say that they decided to purchase the cans of the soup at issue because they thought they were free of preservatives.

Schwartz says she purchased the soup at a cost of nearly $4 a can – a price she wouldn’t have paid had she known the product contained preservatives.

Vanlaningham alleges that she purchased several cans of Campbell soup for approximately $2.49 a can. She says she relied on the packaging informing her the product did not contain preservatives, and she too would not have purchased or paid as much for the soup had she known it actually did contain preservatives.

According to the Campbell Soup class action lawsuit, three variations of “Slow Kettle Style” soup are deceptively advertised:

• Tomato & Sweet Basil Bisque
• Roasted Red Pepper & Smoke Gouda Bisque
• New England Clam Chowder

The Campbell Soup class action lawsuit alleges that the packaging on these soups say “Made with Patience, Not Preservatives.”

Campbell’s “Home Style” soups called into question by this class action lawsuit include:

• Harvest Tomato with Basil
• Zesty Tomato

In addition to Campbell’s “Home Style Healthy Request” Harvest Tomato with Basil soup, the Campbell Soup class action lawsuit alleges that the packaging on these products states “No Preservatives Added.”

“Because the Soups contain the Preservatives, the representations that the Soups contain no preservatives are unfair, false, deceptive, and misleading,” alleges the Campbell Soup class action lawsuit.

“By claiming that the Soups are free of preservatives, Defendant deceives consumers into believing that the Soups do not contain preservatives, when they in fact contain the Preservatives.”

The Campbell Soup class action lawsuit accuses the company of playing on consumers’ desires to purchase healthy, natural products.

By placing statements on the labeling indicating the soups did not contain preservatives, Campbell allegedly duped consumers into paying more for their products.

Further, the preservatives contained in the product are not what consumers who are seeking preservative-free products want, contends the Campbell Soup class action lawsuit.

Citric acid, rather than being derived from citrus fruits, is actually the product of a common black mold, alleges the Campbell Soup class action lawsuit.

Ascorbic acid is used to prevent decay due to oxygenation and to preserve flavor in canned foods. Succinic acid is used to stop the growth of bacteria, mold, and yeast, allege the plaintiffs.

“As a result of Defendant’s deceitful labels, Defendant was able to charge, and Plaintiffs and class members paid, a premium for the supposed preservative-free Soups,” states the Campbell Soup class action lawsuit. “Because they are not in fact preservative-free, the Soups were worth less than they were represented to be, and Plaintiffs and class members paid extra for them.”

The Campbell Soup class action lawsuit seeks to represent Illinois residents who purchased the soups.

The plaintiffs are represented by David C. Nelson of Nelson & Nelson Attorneys at Law PC, and Matthew H. Armstrong of Armstrong Law Firm LLC.

The Campbell Soup “No Preservatives” Class Action Lawsuit is Scwhartz, et al. v. Campbell Soup Co., Case No. 3:18-cv-01655-NJR-DGW, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.