Consumer Protection

New Forbes Column on Crunch Berries, Froot Loops Cases

Although this is a saga that long-time LTB readers may be quite familiar with by now (see, e.g., "Reasonable Consumer Would Know 'Crunch Berries' Are Not Real, Judge Rules," Lowering the Bar (June 2, 2009)), my column this week for Forbes.com…


End of an Era? Another Crunch Berries Case Dismissed

When we last checked in on the Crunch Berries/Froot Loops line of cases, which allege that the marketing of these cereals leads people to believe they contain significant amounts of fruit, eight such cases had been filed and the plaintiffs' record…


A Farewell to Pants

In the least surprising development of the week, the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has affirmed the order dismissing the case of Pants Judge v. District of Columbia, meaning that Roy L. Pearson, Jr., has lost again. This…


Appeal of Crunch Berries Case Dismissed

People, I’ve just received terrible news: the appeal in the Crunch Berries case has been dismissed. As you may recall (I’ve brought it up often enough), this was the California consumer-fraud case in which the plaintiff alleged she had purchased “Cap’n…






Sandwiches Not Sufficiently Meaty, Lawsuit Claims

Saying that certain Blimpie's sandwiches do not live up to advertising claims, Ronald Williams and Jennifer Clayton have sued the chain's owner in Madison County, Illinois, on behalf of a class of similarly situated consumers.  (If any.)  Plaintiffs claim that…


“Baby Einstein” Will Not Make Your Baby Einstein, Lawsuit Claims

A complaint filed in Orange County, California, on January 22 alleges that the makers of "Baby Einstein" videos and the Walt Disney Company (which bought the original company) falsely claimed that the "Baby Einstein" videos were educational products that would make…