Christina Spicer  |  October 12, 2015

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.

Great Value Pork & BeansLast week, a class action lawsuit was filed against Wal-Mart Stores Inc. in California federal court alleging that the store brand Great Value Pork & Beans in Tomato Sauce does not contain any pork.

Lead plaintiffs Matthew Tye, Harry Schmoll and Michael Wilcox allege in their class action lawsuit that scientific evidence shows that Wal-Mart’s Great Value Pork & Beans products contain no pork. They further allege that consumers buy the product under the impression that it contains pork, based on the name, label and listed ingredients.

The Great Value Pork & Beans class action lawsuit alleges that “rigorous scientific testing has revealed that the product actually contains no pork whatsoever.”

“While no one reasonably expects any product called ‘pork & beans’ to contain a majority of pork, or even a large quantity of pork,” qualify the plaintiffs in their class action lawsuit, “it is clear that labeling a product which contains no pork whatsoever as ‘pork & beans’ is misleading and deceptive.”

The plaintiffs propose to represent a nationwide Class of consumers who have bought Wal-Mart’s Great Value Pork & Beans since October 2009 and three subclasses of customers in California, New Jersey and Pennsylvania where the plaintiffs live, respectively.

According to the Wal-Mart class action lawsuit, by not including any pork in their Great Value Pork & Beans, Wal-Mart breached express and implied warranties and was unjustly enriched by the allegedly deceptive practice. The plaintiffs make the breach of warranty and unjust enrichment claims for the proposed nationwide Class.

Wal-Mart also violated various state business and consumer laws, according to the class action lawsuit. The plaintiffs make claims of unlawful, unfair and fraudulent business practices and misleading advertising under various state statutes for each subclass they propose.

The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction against Wal-Mart for the allegedly deceptive marketing practice, along with declaratory and monetary relief for the nationwide Class as well as the subclasses.

“Each and every can of the product bears a uniformly-worded label which makes the same false, affirmative statements of fact regarding whether pork is included in the product,” the plaintiffs allege in their Wal-Mart class action lawsuit.

Similar class action lawsuits have been filed against other companies over the past few months alleging similar misrepresentations to consumers. A proposed class action lawsuit was filed in New York federal court in July accusing Blue Diamond Growers of deceptively marketing its almond milk products as being made primarily from almonds, when in fact the products contain only 2 percent almonds. In another class action, Hampton Creek Inc. is accused of falsely advertising and labeling its Just Mayo vegan spread, which is made entirely of plant products, as mayonnaise.

The plaintiffs are represented by Todd M. Friedman, Suren N. Weerasuriya and Adrian R. Bacon of Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman PC and Stephen P. DeNittis of DeNittis Osefchen PC.

The Wal-Mart Great Value Pork & Beans Class Action Lawsuit is Matthew Tye, et al. v. Wal-Mart Stores Inc., et al., Case No. 8:15-cv-01615, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

UPDATE: On Mar. 9, 2016, Wal-Mart shoppers fought back against the retail giant’s motion to dismiss this class action lawsuit that accuses the company of falsely labeling store brand cans of pork and beans, saying the defendant is ignoring the facts listed in the complaint.

UPDATE 2: On Apr. 7, 2016, Wal-Mart filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s first amended complaint on grounds that the consumer’s opposition brief lacks factual allegations regarding the sensitivity of the alleged testing performed on the product.

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


10 thoughts onWal-Mart’s Pork & Beans Don’t Contain Pork, Class Action Says

  1. Mark Izzard says:

    I buy Great Value pork & beans in molasses because I think that brand tastes the best of any brand. Please bring back under different labeling.

    1. L.G.Swift says:

      I remember when they used to put a little piece of fat or two in their ‘pork and beans’, but then the big ‘chlorestral scare’ came out. Damned if you do and damned if you don’t.

  2. David Mitchell says:

    I contacted Stephen Denittis regarding this product in about June or July 2015. Before that there was no lawsuit according to him. He was part of this suit at some point but is not know? Anyway, it was my complaint as far as I know that kicked off this inquiry. Before my complaint there was nothing about it that I could find. I demand that I be a prat of this suit and that I be compensated proportionately, for bringing this to the attention of the lawyers. If there is proof that I am not the primary plaintiff then present it. Denittis told me that because I complained about his lack a daisy-cal performance in getting back to me he was shutting me out of the suit. I don’t see his name now and wonder if he was shut out as well!

  3. Monica Rodriguez says:

    I’ve purchased pork and beans from Walmart and I’d like to know how to get in on the class action lawsuit against them?

  4. Dawn Nicholson says:

    Actually the Pork and Beans only have a little piece of fat pork in the can for seasoned.

  5. Top Class Actions says:

    UPDATE 2: On Apr. 7, 2016, Wal-Mart filed a motion to dismiss the plaintiff’s first amended complaint on grounds that the consumer’s opposition brief lacks factual allegations regarding the sensitivity of the alleged testing performed on the product.

  6. Top Class Actions says:

    UPDATE: On Mar. 9, 2016, Wal-Mart shoppers fought back against the retail giant’s motion to dismiss this class action lawsuit that accuses the company of falsely labeling store brand cans of pork and beans, saying the defendant is ignoring the facts listed in the complaint.

  7. MISTY says:

    NOPE SURE DONT

  8. karen says:

    I saw a small piece of pork fat in other brands but never in this brand, thought maybe it was in the juice.

  9. maymay says:

    There no pork in pork and beans, of cause not, just the name. I never seen pork in any them. I make baked bean from them. I’m glad there no nasty pork in them.

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.