Results for "starbucks"

Starbucks Cold Drinks

September 24th, 2019

March 2018: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the case finding that no reasonable consumer would think a 12-ounce iced drink is 12 ounces of liquid with no ice and there are no allegations that Starbucks promised the drinks would contain a specific amount of liquid. September 2016: The


Starbucks White Chocolate Doubleshot Energy Drink

October 17th, 2018

In October 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Starbucks for allegedly deceptively advertising that its White Chocolate Doubleshot Energy Drink contains white chocolate when, according to the complaint, the drink does not contain white chocolate, as defined by state and federal law. (Marten et al v. Starbucks Corp., Case No. 18-cv-9201, S. D. NY.)


Starbucks Sour Gummies

October 17th, 2018

In October 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Starbucks for allegedly falsely advertising its sour gummies as “apple, watermelon, tangerine and lemon-flavored candies” to make consumers believe they are flavored with natural ingredients when, according to plaintiffs, the candies contain artificial flavors. (Brown v. Starbucks Corp., Case No. 18-cv-2286, S. D. CA.) For more


Starbucks Lattes

January 12th, 2018

January 2018: A federal judge granted summary judgment in this case concluding that plaintiffs failed to show that lattes contain less than the amount promised on menus. September 2016: Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint adding another named plaintiff. The amended complaint makes the same allegations. March 2016: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Starbucks for


Starbucks Doubleshot® Espresso

September 13th, 2017

Two class-action lawsuits were filed against Starbucks for allegedly falsely advertising its Doubleshot® Espresso products as having two shots of espresso when, according to plaintiffs, the drinks contain significantly less caffeine than the amount contained in two shots of espresso (i.e., 150mg of caffeine). Click on the links below to see each complaint. Naimi et


Starbucks Espresso Beverages

November 29th, 2016

September 2016: After the case was transferred to a California court, the named plaintiff agreed to become a named plaintiff in another case making the same allegations, Strumlauf et al v. Starbucks, and to dismiss this action . (Crittenden et al v. Starbucks Corp., Case No. 16-cv-5049, N. D. CA.) May 2016: A class-action lawsuit was


Starbucks Cold and Iced Drinks

November 28th, 2016

November 2016: A federal judge denied plaintiff’s motion to file an amended complaint because the motion did not include any new material allegations or argument. October 2016: A federal judge granted Starbucks motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim. The judge concluded that a menu listing the size of an iced


Advertised Prices for Breakfast Sandwiches at Starbucks

September 1st, 2016

August 2016: A state judge preliminarily approved a settlement of this action. According to the settlement terms, customers who purchased a reduced fat turkey bacon breakfast sandwich or a sausage and cheddar breakfast sandwich are eligible to receive a 25 cent refund. Class members who used their Starbucks Rewards accounts will receive their refund automatically


The Packaging of Starbucks Frappuccino® and Iced Coffee

August 2nd, 2016

February 2016: This action was voluntarily dismissed . The reasons have not been disclosed. March 2015: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Starbucks for allegedly misleadingly using ed packaging. Specifically, plaintiffs claim that the company covers a portion of the bottle with a non-transparent label to make consumers think they are buying more than they


Tassimo Coffee Brewers and Starbucks

June 29th, 2016

May 2016: The Sixth Circuit dismissed the appeal of the District Court’s denial of class certification and affirmed both the decision to dismiss breach of warranty claims and the attorney’s fees award. To read the decision, click here. March 2015: After a judgment awarding $250 to the plaintiff and $6,767 to the plaintiff’s attorneys was


Starbucks Verismo Coffee System

July 26th, 2013

Starbucks advertised its Verismo at-home coffee system as making “coffeehouse quality lattes…” or “Lattes … made to cafe standard… ,” though presumably without acoustic folk-rock CDs and a coffee cup with “Sven” written on it after telling the barista your name is Steve. But looked into Starbucks’ claims after Kraft, which makes its own at-home


Starbucks Bulk Coffee Bean

January 24th, 2013

Despite denying any wrongdoing, Starbucks has agreed to pay $1.7 million to settle a class-action lawsuit brought against it for allegedly tacking a hidden fee onto certain purchases of bulk coffee beans.  If you purchased less than a pound of scooped coffee beans between 2007 and 2011, you may be entitled to receive a refund. 


Folgers

September 19th, 2019

Just how many cups of coffee does this canister yield?


Bulletproof Coffee

August 14th, 2019

If you take your coffee with a stick of butter, be wary of miracle health claims.


CATrends: Fake White Chocolate

December 19th, 2018

Stocking stuffer alert: These “white chocolate” treats are allegedly missing key ingredients.



Back to Top ↑