Consumers Allege Pulp Fiction in Tropicana's 'Natural' Claims

The Suit

The plaintiffs contend that Tropicana falsely advertises its juice as totally pure and natural because of consumer demand for natural products, and charges a premium over less-expensive juices made from concentrate, even though the Tropicana products are no fresher. They allege violations of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and other causes of action.

Tropicana, a subsidiary of Purchase, NY-based PepsiCo Inc., says through a spokesman: “Our juice is safe and nutritious and Tropicana remains committed to offering great-tasting 100 percent orange juice with no added sugars or preservatives. We take the faith that consumers place in our products seriously and are committed to full compliance with labeling laws and regulations.”

Background

In May, lawyers for Tropicana and for plaintiffs in six pending suits argued before the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation in Washington, DC, urging centralization. The plaintiffs were split between the District of New Jersey and the Middle District of Florida, while Tropicana was amenable to either venue.

On June 11, the panel ' U.S. District Judges W. Royal Furgeson Jr., Barbara Jones, Charles Breyer and Paul Barbadoro ' opted for New Jersey, citing efficiency, common questions of fact, and the convenience of the parties and witnesses. The state, the judges noted, is home to “several third-party flavoring companies that may be relevant to this litigation.”

The panel also found the New Jersey district “has the resources to devote to this litigation,” assigning the cases to U.S. District Judge Dennis Cavanaugh, who is not overseeing any other multidistrict litigation at this time.

One plaintiff, in a suit in the Northern District of Alabama, requested that the multidistrict litigation include suits making similar claims against other orange-juice distributors, such as Simply Orange and Minute Maid, subsidiaries of the Coca-Cola Co., and Wal-Mart, Winn Dixie and Target, which sell generic not-from-concentrate brands. The panel declined to consolidate those matters, finding that “industry-wide centralization likely will result in inefficiencies and delay.”

The multidistrict panel also centralized the litigation against the Coca-Cola defendants in the Western District of Missouri. Since then, eight more suits against Tropicana have been filed, all assigned to Cavanaugh in New Jersey. Counsel for both parties either would not comment or did not return calls at the time of this writing.

David Gialanella is a reporter for the New Jersey Law Journal, an ALM sister publication of this newsletter.

Federal lawsuits are mounting against Tropicana, alleging that its “natural” orange juice is as much a product of laboratory science as of squeezing. Products billed as pure, natural, 100% juice are extensively processed, stored and supplemented with additive flavors before sale, plaintiffs allege in cases consolidated in New Jersey as In re: Tropicana Orange Juice Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, MDL No. 2353.

“Mass marketed orange juice such as Tropicana's cannot be fresh squeezed as fresh squeezed juice is unstable and has a short shelf life,” according to Dennis Lynch of Oakland, the first plaintiff to file suit. “It is not natural orange juice. It is instead a product that is scientifically engineered in laboratories, not nature, which explains its shelf-life of more than two months.”

That engineering allegedly includes pasteurization, mixing of differently flavored oranges from distant regions, removal of air naturally present in the juice, long-term storage lasting a year or more, and the addition of engineered “flavor packs” to make up for taste and aroma that is lost during these processes.

The Suit

The plaintiffs contend that Tropicana falsely advertises its juice as totally pure and natural because of consumer demand for natural products, and charges a premium over less-expensive juices made from concentrate, even though the Tropicana products are no fresher. They allege violations of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and other causes of action.

Tropicana, a subsidiary of Purchase, NY-based PepsiCo Inc., says through a spokesman: “Our juice is safe and nutritious and Tropicana remains committed to offering great-tasting 100 percent orange juice with no added sugars or preservatives. We take the faith that consumers place in our products seriously and are committed to full compliance with labeling laws and regulations.”

Background

In May, lawyers for Tropicana and for plaintiffs in six pending suits argued before the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation in Washington, DC, urging centralization. The plaintiffs were split between the District of New Jersey and the Middle District of Florida, while Tropicana was amenable to either venue.

On June 11, the panel ' U.S. District Judges W. Royal Furgeson Jr., Barbara Jones, Charles Breyer and Paul Barbadoro ' opted for New Jersey, citing efficiency, common questions of fact, and the convenience of the parties and witnesses. The state, the judges noted, is home to “several third-party flavoring companies that may be relevant to this litigation.”

The panel also found the New Jersey district “has the resources to devote to this litigation,” assigning the cases to U.S. District Judge Dennis Cavanaugh, who is not overseeing any other multidistrict litigation at this time.

One plaintiff, in a suit in the Northern District of Alabama, requested that the multidistrict litigation include suits making similar claims against other orange-juice distributors, such as Simply Orange and Minute Maid, subsidiaries of the Coca-Cola Co., and Wal-Mart, Winn Dixie and Target, which sell generic not-from-concentrate brands. The panel declined to consolidate those matters, finding that “industry-wide centralization likely will result in inefficiencies and delay.”

The multidistrict panel also centralized the litigation against the Coca-Cola defendants in the Western District of Missouri. Since then, eight more suits against Tropicana have been filed, all assigned to Cavanaugh in New Jersey. Counsel for both parties either would not comment or did not return calls at the time of this writing.

David Gialanella is a reporter for the New Jersey Law Journal, an ALM sister publication of this newsletter.