Steven Cohen  |  February 26, 2020

Category: Consumer News

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 California federal court judge has certified a class action lawsuit against Sue Bee by a consumer who claims the company falsely labels their honey as being “100% pure.”

Plaintiff Susan Tran notes that by marketing their product as “Pure” or “100% Pure,” the defendant is taking market share away from their competition and can potentially sell more of their products at a higher volume.

The plaintiff states in her class action lawsuit she would not have purchased the defendant’s products if she had known the honey was tainted with glyphosate. 

On Monday, U.S. District Judge Josephine Staton certified a Class of California residents who bought Sue Bee honey since 2014.

The judge’s order states that the defendant Sioux Honey Association Cooperative markets and sells honey under numerous trademarks, such as Sue Bee and Aunt Sue’s. 

Tran says she started buying Sue Bee products once a month beginning in 2013. Tran states that she began purchasing the products because the labels represented that the product was “Pure” or “100% Pure” honey.

However, the plaintiff alleges the Sue Bee Products were not pure because the product contains glyphosate, which is a synthetic chemical and herbicide. In addition, the plaintiff claims that glyphosate is a potential carcinogen.

The judge opines that the total number of putative Class Members will be in the thousands, which meets the numerosity requirement of obtaining class action status.

According to the judge’s ruling, the defendant claims there is no evidence that an overwhelming number of consumers were misled, there is no proof that the consumers suffered economic harm and that the reliance varies from consumer to consumer.

In addition, Sioux Honey argues that there is evidence that the purported Class Members may have purchased the honey because of other motivators, such as family tradition, or that the labeling is not necessarily the principle motivator in purchasing the product, according to the judge’s opinion.

Also, the defendant alleges that the plaintiff lacks standing in this case because she is not able to demonstrate that the misleading label caused any economic injury and that the labeling was actually deceptive.

“Between the FAC, her declaration, her responses to Sioux’s interrogatories, and her deposition testimony, Tran has repeatedly stated that, due in part to reliance on Sioux’s purity-based labeling, she purchased Sioux honey products at higher prices than she otherwise would have been willing to pay,” the judge ruled.

The judge also rejected the defendant’s notion that Tran offered “no evidence that any other purchasers of the products share her preposterous, unrealistic definition of purity,” because the law that she claims the defendant violated only needs to demonstrate that she bought the product that is marketed with a material misrepresentation.

Have you purchased Sue Bee honey thinking that the product was “100% Pure?” Leave a message in the comments section below.

The plaintiff is represented by Kim E. Richman and Jaimie Mak of Richman Law Group, Rosemary M. Rivas and Courtney E. Maccarone of Levi & Korsinsky LLP, Stephen R. Basser and Samuel M. Ward of Barrack Rodos & Bacine and John G. Emerson of Emerson Scott LLP.

The Sue Bee Honey Class Action Lawsuit is Tran v. Sioux Honey Association Cooperative, Case No. 8:17-cv-00110, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

We tell you about cash you can claim EVERY WEEK! Sign up for our free newsletter.


901 thoughts onSue Bee ‘100% Pure’ Honey Class Action Gets Certified

  1. Cindy Miller says:

    Please add me.

  2. Guido Luis Pales says:

    Please add me.

  3. Barbara Rosser says:

    Please add me, this is the only kind of honey I buy

  4. M. Monahan says:

    Please add me. I have been purchasing this honey for many years in bulk for my family.

1 85 86 87

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. By submitting your comment and contact information, you agree to receive marketing emails from Top Class Actions regarding this and/or similar lawsuits or settlements, and/or to be contacted by an attorney or law firm to discuss the details of your potential case at no charge to you if you qualify. Required fields are marked *

Please note: Top Class Actions is not a settlement administrator or law firm. Top Class Actions is a legal news source that reports on class action lawsuits, class action settlements, drug injury lawsuits and product liability lawsuits. Top Class Actions does not process claims and we cannot advise you on the status of any class action settlement claim. You must contact the settlement administrator or your attorney for any updates regarding your claim status, claim form or questions about when payments are expected to be mailed out.