Mott’s Class Action Lawsuit Says Fruit Snacks Hide Artificial Flavoring

A recent class action lawsuit alleges that Mott’s fruit snacks contain artificial flavoring despite no mention of artificial flavors on the snacks’ labeling.

Plaintiff Adrienne Morris says Mott’s fruit snacks are gummies advertised with prominent images of apples, pears, strawberries, carrots, and other fruits and vegetables.

The packaging for Mott’s fruit snacks states that the products are “Made with REAL Fruit & Veggie Juice.”

However, the Mott’s fruit snacks reportedly contain malic acid – a synthetic chemical used to mimic the tangy taste of fruits such as blueberries, lemons, mangos, and cherries.

Malic acid occurs naturally in some fruits and vegetables, but the defendant allegedly uses a synthetic version of the flavoring known as d-l malic acid which is manufactured from benzene or butane.

“Defendant’s labeling and advertising scheme is deliberately intended to give consumers the false impression that the Products are composed only of natural flavors from assorted fruit and vegetable flavors,” the Mott’s fruit snacks class action argues.

Morris claims that Mott’s intentionally markets their fruit snacks as natural in order to take advantage of the consumer tendency to purchase food products without artificial flavoring.

The Mott’s fruit snacks class action references a Forbes Magazine report which showed that “all demographics [of consumers] – from Generation Z to Baby Boomers – say they would pay more” for such products, specifically including foods with no artificial flavors. Forty-one percent (41%) of consumers rated the absence of artificial flavors in food products as ‘Very Important,’ and eighty percent (80%) of North American consumers are willing to pay a premium for foods with no artificial ingredients.”

The Mott’s class action further claims that, by failing to disclose that Mott’s fruit snacks contain artificial flavoring, the company is in violation of the law.

FDA regulations and California law require companies to disclose if their products contain artificial flavoring, particularly if they enforce a characterizing flavor.

Characterizing flavors are recognizable primary flavors identified on the front label. Morris argues that malic acid reinforces the characterizing flavors of Mott’s fruit snacks, so the use of artificial flavoring should be disclosed.

“The synthetic d-l malic acid in the Products simulate, resemble, and reinforce the characterizing fruit flavors for the Products,” the Mott’s fruit snacks class action lawsuit states. “Under these regulations, Defendant was required to place prominently on the Products’ front label a notice sufficient to allow California consumers to understand that the Products contain artificial flavorings.”

Morris seeks to represent a Class of consumers who purchased Mott’s fruit snacks since Jan. 1, 2012.

She also seeks to represent a Class of the same consumers in California who are protected under additional state laws.

The Mott’s fruit snacks class action lawsuit seeks disgorgement, restitution, punitive damages, court costs, and attorneys’ fees.

Morris is represented by Ronald A. Marron and Michael R. Houchin of Law Offices of Ronald A. Marron; and Scott J. Ferrell of Pacific Trial Attorneys.

The Mott’s Fruit Snacks Class Action Lawsuit is Morris v. Mott’s LLP, Case No. 8:18-cv-01799-AG-ADS, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.