Hostess Carrot Cake Donettes Don’t Contain Real Carrots, Class Action Says

A woman has filed a class action lawsuit against Hostess Brands, accusing the company of misrepresenting the ingredients used in its Carrot Cake Donettes.

Plaintiff Donna James says the packaging on the product is misleading because the Hostess Donettes use fewer carrots than consumers expect and do not contain real carrots.

James says consumers expect a label to accurately describe what the package contains, so whether a food’s flavor is from a “characterizing food ingredient or a highly synthesized and concentrated solution, designed in a laboratory” is important.

The Hostess Donettes, however, do not contain any carrots “in a form expected by consumers” when the product is identified as carrot cake, James says. Rather, the flavor comes from “natural and artificial flavor,” as reflected in the ingredient list.

The plaintiff says the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act indicates a food is misbranded if “its labeling is false or misleading in any particular.” 

And the Food and Drug Administration says product names can be misleading when they suggest one or more, but not all, key ingredients, yet fail to disclose more predominant ingredients such as natural and artificial flavors.

The carrot cake Hostess Donettes packaging does not let consumers know the percentage of carrots in the product, the class action lawsuit maintains. And since the ingredient list does not include carrots, that means that if any carrots are present, it is only as part of the “natural” flavor. 

James’ complaint says the representations on the Hostess Donettes packaging are misleading because artificial flavors contribute to the carrot cake taste. Consumers are allegedly being misled by this because they do not expect the carrot taste to be a result of artificial flavorings.

The plaintiff maintains that consumers are unable to tell by reading the ingredient list that the Hostess Donettes do not contain real carrots because they are unfamiliar with food labeling regulations companies are required to follow. 

“Consumers will not be able to tell from the ingredient list that the artificial flavor in the Product provides a carrot taste, because artificial flavor is only required to be listed on the front label if it affects a food’s taste,” the complaint says.

Therefore, according to James, the defendant’s branding and packaging of the carrot cake Hostess Donettes is designed to mislead and defraud consumers.

James bought the Hostess Donettes expecting that the carrot flavor came from carrots rather than artificial carrot flavoring because “because the front label did not disclose this nor was it clarified by the ingredient list,” the complaint says.

The plaintiff alleges she was deceived by the product’s label and would not have purchased the Hostess Donettes if the defendant hadn’t misrepresented it.

She also claims the product was worth less than what she paid for it and that she and the Class Members lost money due to Hostess’ unlawful behavior.

James intends to purchase the Hostess Carrot Cake Donettes again “when can do so with the assurance that Product’s label is lawful and consistent with the Product’s ingredients,” the class action lawsuit says.

Hostess was able to sell more of the carrot cake Donettes and at higher prices than it would have been able to had it not used the allegedly deceptive labeling, resulting in higher profits at the expense of consumers.

James’ class action lawsuit states the Hostess Donettes’ value was materially less than the value represented by the company, and had she and the putative Class Members known the truth about the product, they would have not bought the Donettes or would have paid less for them.

As a result of the allegedly misleading label, the Hostess Donettes are sold at a premium compared to other similar products that are “represented in a non-misleading way,” the complaint says.

The proposed Class includes any New York resident who purchased Hostess Carrot Cake Donettes during the statutes of limitations. 

James is seeking preliminary and permanent injunctive relief directing Hostess to correct the allegedly misleading practices; restitution and disgorgement for Class Members; monetary damages; court costs and expenses, including attorneys’ fees and experts’ fees; and any other relief the Court deems appropriate.

The plaintiff also demands a jury trial on all issues.

Did you purchase Hostess Carrot Cake Donettes expecting them to contain a certain amount of carrot? Let us know in the comments.

The plaintiff is represented by Spencer Sheehan of Sheehan and Associates PC.

The Hostess Carrot Cake Donettes Class Action Lawsuit is Donna James, et al. v. Hostess Brands LLC, Case No. 1:20-cv-06259, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

Strange Honey Class Action Says It Contains Filler Ingredients

Judge Tosses Oreo Cookies Ingredients Class Action Lawsuit

New Surgical Stapler Lawsuit Filed Against Ethicon

Car Dealership TCPA Violations: Text Message Spam, Robocalls, Cell Phone Calls & Prerecorded Messages