BENTON – Two Minnesota businesses nipped class actions in the bud at U.S. district court on July 6.
Fruit Roll Up buyer Connie Newman of St. Clair County dismissed a labeling suit against General Mills with prejudice barely a year after filing it.
Christopher Coleman of Cairo dismissed a privacy invasion suit against debt collector Direct Recovery Services with prejudice in its sixth month.
General Mills operates in Minneapolis and Direct Recovery Services operates in Two Harbors.
Attorney David Nelson of Belleville filed Newman’s suit against General Mills in St. Clair County circuit court in June 2019, proposing to certify an Illinois class.
He wrote that Newman bought Roll Ups for a dollar at Dollar Tree in Belleville.
Labels allegedly violate Illinois consumer fraud law by stating “naturally flavored” and “no artificial flavors.”
Nelson wrote that the products contained malic acid, “an artificial petrochemical that confers a tart, fruit like flavor and stimulates the flavor of actual fruit.”
“If plaintiff had known the products contained a synthetic flavoring compound, she would not have purchased them or would have paid less for them,” he wrote.
The lawsuit sought recovery “equal to an amount up to a refund of the purchase prices.”
Nelson proposed to certify an Illinois class and set a class period of five years.
He wrote that total damages were far less than the $5 million minimum for federal jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act.
He wrote that General Mills couldn’t plausibly allege otherwise.
General Mills counsel Kathleen Stetsko alleged otherwise and removed the complaint to district court in August.
She wrote that General Mills might be on the hook for five years of refunds, and she submitted confidential sales figures to District Judge Staci Yandle.
Nelson chose not to move for an order remanding the suit to St. Clair County.
General Mills counsel Lauren Staniar of Chicago moved to dismiss the suit in September, claiming malic acid didn’t function as a flavor.
She wrote that federal regulations recognized several functions including pH control and flavor enhancement.
“No reasonable consumer thinks an ingredient should be labeled as a flavor even when it does not function as one,” Staniar wrote.
Nelson’s associate Joshua Eggnatz of Davies, Florida, responded, “Plaintiff specifically alleges that the natural claims can mislead a reasonable consumer because malic acid, as used in Fruit Roll Ups, functions as a flavoring as reasonable consumers understand the term.”
Staniar replied that a Northern District judge had just dismissed a suit over citric acid in Capri Sun products of Kraft Heinz.
Yandle received notice in April that the parties settled, and the parties made it official three months later.
Coleman’s suit against Direct Recovery Services started as a potential national class action but never advanced.
Alexander Kruzyk of Austin, Texas, filed it in January, alleging invasion of privacy, intrusion, and nuisance.
He proposed to certify a class under telephone consumer law and a class under fair debt collection law.
After service of summons, nothing appeared on the docket until Kruzyk filed notice of voluntary dismissal.