Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States District Court for the Southern District of New York
February 22, 2021, Decided
19 Civ. 10686 (KPF)
[*569] OPINION AND ORDER
KATHERINE POLK FAILLA, District Judge:
In the past two years, counsel for Plaintiffs Ryan Cosgrove and Amanda Crout has filed numerous class action complaints across the country, including several in this District, challenging food manufacturers' use of the term "vanilla" in their descriptions or advertising. See, e.g., Twohig v. Shop-Rite Supermarkets, Inc., — F. Supp. 3d —, No. 20 Civ. 763 (CS), 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26489, 2021 WL 518021 (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 11, 2021); Wynn v. Topco Assocs., LLC, No. 19 Civ. 11104 (RA), 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9714, 2021 WL 168541 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 19, 2021); Barreto v. Westbrae Nat., Inc., No. 19 Civ. 9677 (PKC), 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3436, 2021 WL 76331 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 7, 2021); Cosgrove v. Blue Diamond Growers, No. 19 Civ. 8993 (VM), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 229294, 2020 WL 7211218 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 7, 2020); Pichardo v. Only What You Need, Inc., No. 20 Civ. 493 (VEC), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 199791, 2020 WL 6323775 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 27, 2020); Steele v. Wegmans Food Mkts., Inc., 472 F. Supp. 3d 47 (S.D.N.Y. 2020); see also Sharpe v. A&W Concentrate Co., 481 F. Supp. 3d 94, No. 19 Civ. 768 (BMC), 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152801, 2020 WL 4931045 (E.D.N.Y. Aug. 24, 2020). In nearly all of these cases, the district court ultimately found that the plaintiffs had failed to state a viable claim for relief. This time, Plaintiffs [**2] challenge Defendant Oregon Chai, Inc. ("Oregon Chai"), claiming that Defendant's use of the term "vanilla" and other statements on the packaging of its chai tea latte powdered mix is misleading to consumers. As set forth in the remainder of this Opinion, this Court agrees with the majority of district courts to have considered the matter, and dismisses the complaint for failure to state a claim.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
520 F. Supp. 3d 562 *; 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32229 **; 2021 WL 706227
RYAN COSGROVE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, -v.- OREGON CHAI, INC., Defendant.
vanilla, flavor, ingredients, products, Chai, consumer, artificial, grain, packaging, Plaintiffs', vanillin, warranty, beans, deceptive, district court, flour, label, misleading, vanilla extract, motion to dismiss, references, pleadings, merchantability, allegations, maltol, predominant, quotation, spices, plant, tea
Civil Procedure, Dismissal, Involuntary Dismissals, Motions, Defenses, Demurrers & Objections, Motions to Dismiss, Failure to State Claim, Pleading & Practice, Motion Practice, Content & Form, Special Proceedings, Class Actions, Class Action Fairness Act, Diversity Jurisdiction, Amount in Controversy, Determination, Evidence, Burdens of Proof, Allocation, Preponderance of Evidence, Jurisdiction, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Amount in Controversy, Challenges, Judgments, Relief From Judgments, Altering & Amending Judgments, Pleadings, Complaints, Requirements for Complaint, Rule Application & Interpretation, Antitrust & Trade Law, Consumer Protection, Deceptive & Unfair Trade Practices, State Regulation, Heightened Pleading Requirements, Fraud Claims, False Advertising, Judicial Notice, Adjudicative Facts, Facts Generally Known, Verifiable Facts, Torts, Fraud & Misrepresentation, Negligent Misrepresentation, Elements, Business & Corporate Compliance, Contracts Law, Breach, Breach of Warranty, Products Liability, Theories of Liability, Breach, Excuse & Repudiation, Acceptance of Goods, Notice of Breach, Contract Conditions & Provisions, Express Warranties, Types of Contracts, Sales of Goods, Warranties, Merchantability, Commercial Law (UCC), Contract Provisions, Implied Warranty of Fitness, Implied Warranty of Merchantability, Implied Warranties, Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, Remedies, Scope, Actual Fraud, Contracts Law, Remedies, Equitable Relief, Quantum Meruit