A class of consumers is suing Schnucks for allegedly misrepresenting how many cups of coffee can be prepared with its store-brand ground coffee.
Attorney Mark Goldenberg of Goldenberg Heller & Antognoli PC in Edwardsville filed the lawsuit on behalf of plaintiff Julie Clark on Jan. 5 in the St. Clair County Circuit Court against Schnuck Markets Inc.
“This case is based on a straightforward and simple claim of misrepresentations and deception by Schnucks in selling Schnucks-brand ground coffee in canisters that grossly overstate the number of cups of coffee that can be made from their contents,” Goldenberg wrote.
According to the complaint, Clark claims she regularly buys Schnucks-brand ground coffee in a canister at the Schnuck’s on North Belt West in Belleville. On Nov. 9, she bought the Schnucks-brand Smooth Satin ground coffee in a 24.2 oz. canister for $6.49. She alleges the canisters represent that the contents are sufficient to make a specified number of cups. However, she claims the representations are false.
“At all times, plaintiff believed and had a reasonable expectation that the labeling on the class products was truthful and accurate,” Goldenberg wrote.
The suit states that when consumers follow the directions to prepare the coffee, the contents are insufficient to make the specified number of cups.
“Brewing instructions on the sides of the canisters direct consumers to use two methods. To make one cup, the directions state the consumer is to use one tablespoon, and to make ten cups, the consumer is to use a half cup,” Goldenberg wrote.
“However, those instructions will not produce the number of six fluid oz. cups of coffee represented on the package,” he added.
For example, when following the instructions, the 30.5 oz. canister of Classic Roast will produce about 173 cups of coffee instead of the 240 cups represented.
Clark alleges the coffee yield is deceptive.
“By placing the representation regarding the number of cups the canister will make in such a prominent position on the packaging of the class products, Schnucks intended that consumers would rely on it in deciding to purchase the product,” Goldenberg wrote.
The plaintiffs allege the defendant’s “misrepresentations” are “especially egregious” because Schnucks sells other brands of coffee that do not indicate the number of cups that can be made from a canister of coffee.
“These examples of ground-coffee products that do not misrepresent the number of cups that can be made from their contents - and, in many cases, do not even show the number of such cups - demonstrate that there is no legitimate commercial reason why Schnucks displays the number of cups that can be made from some of its coffee products and misrepresents that fact.
The products at issue include the Schnucks-brand Breakfast Blend, Classic Decaf, Classic Roast, 100% Columbian, Donut Shop Ground Coffee, French Roast, Half Caff and Smooth Satin.
The defendant is accused of falsely stating and misrepresenting material facts regarding the number of cups that a canister of coffee can make; representing that the coffee products have characteristics, benefits or quantities that they do not have; and advertising goods with intent not to sell them as advertised.
As a result, the suit states that class members overpaid for the Schnucks coffee “because they paid a price that was based on defendant’s material misrepresentations and concealments regarding the number of cups that can be made from the class products.”
They argue that Schnucks should not be allowed to retain the money gained “through deceptive and fraudulent material misrepresentations and omissions in the marketing, advertising, and selling of the class products.”
The proposed class includes “all persons in the state of Illinois who purchased one or more of the Class Products in Illinois during the Class Period.”
The class period is described as “the period within the statute of limitations for this action and extending until a class is certified herein.”
The class seeks unspecified compensatory damages, punitive damages, court costs, attorney’s fees and injunctive relief enjoining the defendant from continuing to engage in the alleged actions and ordering it to do a corrective advertising campaign.
St. Clair County Circuit Court case number 21-L-7