Results for "candy"

Boxes of Swedish Fish Candy

September 23rd, 2020

In September 2020, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Mondelez International for allegedly misleadingly using ed boxes for its Swedish Fish candy. Specifically, plaintiffs claim that the boxes of Swedish Fish are more than half empty space. (Coleman et al v. Mondelez International Inc., Case No. 20-cv-8100, C.D. Cal.) For more of TINA.org’s coverage of


Boxes of Mike and Ike and Hot Tamales Candy

September 9th, 2020

July 2020: A settlement agreement that would resolve this case, along with a Mateski v. Just Born, was preliminarily approved. The settlement terms would provide class members who have proof of purchase with either a $0.50 cash award for each product purchased or a voucher for one free box of candy for every two boxes


Boxes of Jujyfruits® Candy

November 21st, 2019

July 2019: The appeal was dismissed for failure to prosecute. (Case No. 18-17269, 9th Cir.) November 2018: An objector filed a Notice of Appeal regarding the approval of the settlement. October 2018: A federal judge granted final approval of the settlement agreement. June 2018: A federal judge preliminarily approved the proposed settlement agreement. A final


Packaging of Hot Tamales and Mike and Ike Candy

September 24th, 2019

November 2018: This case was dismissed because the parties reached a settlement agreement, the terms of which have not been disclosed. February 2017: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Just Born for allegedly deceptively using ed packaging for Hot Tamales and Mike and Ike candy. According to the complaint, boxes of Hot Tamales candy have


See’s Candy Shops Classic Red Heart Assorted Chocolates

February 14th, 2019

August 2017: This action was dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. February 2016: A class-action lawsuit was filed against See’s Candy Shops for allegedly deceptively marketing its Classic Red Heart Assorted Chocolates using a Kosher certified symbol when, according to plaintiffs, they are not Kosher certified. (Weiss et al v. See’s Candy Shops Inc.,


Boxes of Reese’s Pieces and Whoppers Candy

October 19th, 2018

February 2018: A federal judge granted The Hershey Company’s motion for summary judgment finding that the named plaintiff failed to show that the allegedly deceptive practice caused him injury because he knew how much empty space was in each box of candy and continued to purchase them. 2016: A false advertising class-action lawsuit was filed


Gold Emblem® Red Fish Candy

October 19th, 2018

April 2018: A federal judge dismissed this case because the parties reported that they reached a settlement agreement. November 2017: A class-action lawsuit was filed against CVS for allegedly deceptively using ed plastic bags for Gold Emblem® red fish candy. According to the complaint, the bags of candy are less than half full and have


Boxes of Chewy Red Hots Candy

October 19th, 2018

October 2017: The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s decision to remand the case to state court. Click here to read the decision. August 2017: Ferrara Candy Co. filed a Notice of Appeal regarding the decision to remand the case to state court. June 2017: A federal judge remanded the case to


M&M’s Candies, Dove Candy Bars, Snickers Bars, and More

September 19th, 2017

November 2014: This case was voluntarily dismissed, the reasons for which have not been disclosed. The named plaintiff’s individual claims were dismissed and the class members’ claims were dismissed . July 2014: A false advertising class-action lawsuit was filed against Mars, Inc. for allegedly misleadingly marketing several types of candy, including Dark Chocolate M&Ms, Peanut


Sour Patch Watermelon Candy

September 19th, 2017

October 2016: A federal judge dismissed this complaint finding that the named plaintiff did not have standing (i.e., a proper basis) for injunctive relief, failed to allege an injury, and the complaint did not meet the heightened pleading standard for fraud-based claims. To learn more about the reasons for the dismissal, click here. June 2016:


The Organic Candy Factory’s Gummy Candy

July 31st, 2017

In July 2017, a class-action lawsuit was filed against The Organic Candy Factory for allegedly misleadingly marketing its Gummy Cubs, as well as chocolate bars filled with gummy candy. Specifically, plaintiffs claim that the company markets the “Peach” and “Boysenberry, Blackberry & Raspberry” flavors of gummy candy as containing peach, boysenberry, blackberry and raspberry ingredients


Mars Chocolate Candy Products

October 26th, 2016

December 2014: A federal judge granted Mars, Inc.’s motion to stay the proceedings (and administratively closed the case) pending the resolution of an appeal of a district court’s decision to deny class certification in another false advertising class action (Jones v. ConAgra) as the decision could have an impact on this case. October 2013: A


Go Organic Hard Candy

October 26th, 2016

A false advertising class-action lawsuit was filed against Hillside Candy in August 2016 (and transferred to federal court in October 2016) for allegedly deceptively listing “evaporated cane juice” as an ingredient in Go Organic Hard Candy when the candy actually contains sugar. (Garcia et al v. Hillside Candy LLC and Does 1-25, Case No. 16-cv-2231,


SmartCandy

April 20th, 2015

Regulators question whether the gummy snack is anything more than a “nutritionally void candy.”


Boxes of Hot Tamales and Mike and Ike Candies

September 9th, 2020

July 2020: A settlement agreement that would resolve this case, along with Escobar v. Just Born, was preliminarily approved. The settlement would provide class members who have proof of purchase with either a $0.50 cash award for each product purchased or a voucher for one free box of candy for every two boxes purchased (for


Boxes of Raisinets, Sno Caps, Nerds and Other Candies

May 27th, 2020

In May 2020, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Nestle USA and Ferrara Candy Company for allegedly deceptively using ed opaque boxes for candies – including Raisinets, Sno Caps, and Nerds — that are half empty. (Iglesia et al v. Nestle USA, Inc. and Ferrara Candy Company, Case No. 20-cv-5971, D.N.J.) For more of TINA.org’s


Sheer Pre-Workout Workout Enhancer Powder

March 27th, 2020

In March 2020, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Sheer Strength Labs for allegedly misleadingly and unlawfully advertising Sheer Pre-Workout Workout Enhancer Powder Cotton Candy as a dietary supplement when, according to plaintiffs, the supplement contains ingredients that are dangerous and not approved by the FDA. (Boyer et al v. Sheer Strength Labs, LLC, Case


Ryan ToysReview: Target Audience

August 28th, 2019

In order to establish the age of Ryan ToysReview’s target audience, TINA.org conducted an appraisal of every video published on the YouTube channel between January 1 and July 31, 2019, which revealed that 92 percent promote at least one product or television/YouTube program that is appropriate for – and targeted at – children under the


Nerds, Runts, and Other Candies

July 25th, 2019

In July 2019, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Ferrara Candy Company for allegedly falsely advertising that its candies – including Nerds, Runts, and Everlasting Gobstoppers – do not contain artificial flavors when, according to plaintiffs, they contain the synthetic ingredient malic acid. (Gruber et al v. Ferrara Candy Co., Case No. 19-cv-4700, N. D.



Back to Top ↑