New Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream Settlement Tentatively Rejected

New Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream Settlement Tentatively Rejected

By Sarah Pierce

A California federal judge on Monday refused to sign off on a proposed $1.3 million class action lawsuit settlement over claims that Ben & Jerry’s ice cream is falsely marketed as “all natural,” saying he wants both sides to explain how the deal would benefit Class Members over a previous deal that was rejected in September.

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey S. White tentatively denied the class action settlement agreement, which would allow consumers to receive between $6 and $50, saying he wants both sides to explain why the agreement “substantially reduces” the funds available for Class Members from a $7.5 million class action settlement proposed in a related case.

If you remember, a federal court rejected a proposed settlement in the class action lawsuit Astiana v. Ben & Jerry’s Homemade Inc. on several grounds, including that poor notice was given to Class Members and because it capped the payout to consumers without receipts to only $6 while millions of dollars from the settlement would have gone to Ben & Jerry’s parent company Unilever’s own charity.  

One of the objectors to the Astiana v. Ben & Jerry’s settlement was Colleen Tobin, who filed her own class action lawsuit the day after the deal was rejected.

Tobin claims the new deal with Ben & Jerry’s solves the problems with the previous case, but Judge White was unconvinced.

“Why should the Court not view this settlement with greater skepticism given that it substantially reduces the funds available for settlement purposes from the settlement proposed in Astiana, the fees and administrative costs are to be deducted from that fund, [and the] Plaintiff intends to seek over 20% of the available funds…?” White asked.

The judge also asked both sides to explain how the new agreement will yield a greater number of claimants than the previous one, and to provide evidence that the proposed Internet notice would be effective.

“The parties state that they will include all claims that were submitted as part of the Astiana settlement,” the judge said. “However, given the low response to publication notice, what is the party’s best argument that additional publication notice would not be the best notice practicable under the circumstances?”

Judge White also said he did not see the connection between the proposed charities and the nature of the claims.

The case is Colleen Tobin v. Conopco, Inc. d/b/a Unilever and Ben & Jerry’s Homemade, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-5812, New Jersey District Court.

Updated April 18th, 2013

All class action and lawsuit news updates are listed in the Lawsuit News section of Top Class Actions