Class Action Says Edy’s, Dreyer’s Fruit Bars Aren’t ‘All Natural’

A California woman says she was misled by Nestle USA Inc.’s use of the phrase “all-natural” in describing two different brands of fruit bars sold under the Dreyer’s and Edy’s brand, in a new class action lawsuit filed Jan. 17.

In labels provided as exhibits to the complaint, plaintiff Marinanna Belli notes that the back panel of the fruit bars includes an ingredient list with “beet juice extract, turmetic color, ascorbic acid and citric acid.” While those are all naturally occurring chemicals, her class action lawsuit alleges that their addition to the ingredients is instead an artificial one since they are “used to preserve food” or add color.

Belli alleges that Nestle’s subsidiaries Dreyer’s and Edy’s misrepresented the contents of the fruit bars, which she bought because she believed them to be healthier than other alternatives on the market. On behalf of a class of buyers who purchased the products with the alleged illegal labeling since 2008, she is seeking damages on violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law, Consumer Legal Remedies Act and Sherman Act.

The first two revolve around the injuries suffered by Belli in that she spent more than $25 in total, which she says she would not have done if the Dreyer’s fruit bars and Edy’s fruit bars had been properly labeled. Sherman Act violations, her lawyers argue, make the product illegal and she “would not have purchased [them] had she known she were illegal to purchase and possess.”

Barring a settlement, a jury will need to decide whether or not the woman’s allegations meet the “reasonable consumer” test, specifically whether a rational buyer would assume that with an “all natural label” the products “do not contain added artificial ingredients” in the sense that they are added for specific purposes such as coloring and preservation.

Nestle managed to escape a separate but similar “all natural” class action lawsuit in October, which accused the food giant of misleading customers by labeling several of its pasta products as “all natural” when they included artificial ingredients.

Food mislabeling class actions seeking damages on violations of the Sherman Act and the Unfair Competition Law have grown in number with plaintiffs arguing that there are stringent requirements for the listing of sugar-based ingredients and, as with Belli, the use of additional materials that lead to confused customers. Many use the Sherman Act because it complies with Food and Drug Administration regulations but offers more opportunities for legal redress on issues like the fruit bars.

Belli is represented by class action lawyers Ben F. Pierce Gore of Pratt & Associates and Charles Barrett of Charles Barrett PC.

The Nestle Food Labeling Class Action Lawsuit is Marianna Belli v. Nestle USA Inc., Case No. 14-cv-00286, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California.