Starbucks class action claims retailer adds surcharge for non-dairy milk

Starbucks surcharge class action lawsuit overview:

• Who: Plaintiffs Maria Bollinger, Dawn Miller and Shunda Smith filed a class action lawsuit against Starbucks Corporation.
• Why: Starbucks allegedly imposes a surcharge for all non-dairy milk substitutions.
• Where: The Starbucks class action lawsuit was filed in California federal court.

Starbucks Corporation imposes a surcharge for all non-dairy milk substitutes, forcing lactose intolerant customers to pay higher prices for beverages, a new Starbucks class action lawsuit alleges.

Plaintiffs Maria Bollinger, Dawn Miller and Shunda Smith are lactose intolerant, according to the Starbucks class action lawsuit. Lactose intolerance is considered a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the lawsuit explains.

When the plaintiffs visited Starbucks stores, they say they ordered drinks that contained 2% milk as part of the regular menu item. When they requested a non-dairy alternative such as soy, oat, coconut or almond “milk,” they say they were charged a Starbucks surcharge ranging from 50 to 80 cents.

They claim the Starbucks surcharge is the same for all non-dairy milk alternative products, and can be as much as 40% of the average drink price.

Starbucks surcharge creates higher-priced lactose-free menu, plaintiffs say

Starbucks makes other modifications to its regular beverage offerings at no charge, including using sugar-free sweeteners or making caffeine-free versions for individuals with a variety of other conditions like diabetes or hypertension, the Starbucks class action lawsuit says.

“In fact, Starbucks created a separate, higher-priced menu, aimed at customers who cannot ingest milk,” the Starbucks non-dairy milk lawsuit alleges, noting the coffee chain does not impose a Starbucks surcharge on whole milk, half-and-half or skim milk substitutions.

The plaintiffs argue the Starbucks surcharge is not justified because there is no material price difference between lactose-containing milks and some types of non-dairy alternatives.

Bollinger, Miller and Smith filed the Starbucks class action lawsuit on behalf of a nationwide class and California subclass of lactose intolerant consumers who purchased drinks from Starbucks within the applicable statute of limitations period.

The Starbucks surcharge lawsuit asserts claims for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act and unjust enrichment.

Dunkin’ Donuts was recently hit with a similar class action lawsuit for allegedly charging a non-dairy milk surcharge.

Have you paid a Starbucks surcharge for non-dairy milk? Tell us about your experience in the comments.

The plaintiffs are represented by Trenton R. Kashima of Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips Grossman PLLC.

The Starbucks non-dairy milk surcharge class action lawsuit is Maria Bollinger, et al. v. Starbucks Corp., Case No. 1:24-cv-00303-JLT-SKO, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Trader Joe’s dumplings recall announced due to potential plastic contamination
• PFAS food packaging no longer in use, FDA says
• Chipotle class action claims company won’t refund orders paid with gift cards
• Man files lawsuit against Disney over wife’s allergy death