Law Street Media

Food Retailer Sued Over Allegedly Misleading Gluten Free Labelling

A plate of assorted foods.

Food backgrounds: top view of a rustic wooden table filled with different types of food. At the center of the frame is a cutting board with beef steak and a salmon fillet and all around it is a large variety of food like fruits, vegetables, cheese, bread, eggs, legumes, olive oil and nuts. DSRL studio photo taken with Canon EOS 5D Mk II and Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS II USM Telephoto Zoom Lens

On Monday, plaintiff Oluwakemi Adewol filed a putative  consumer class action in the Eastern District of Missouri against Frickenschmidt Foods, LLC. The plaintiff alleges that the defendant labels its Wicked Cutz Teriyaki Beef Stick product as gluten free when it, per the complaint, actually does contain gluten.

Plaintiff seeks relief on behalf of three separate classes of product purchasers:  a “Multi-State Consumer Class” consisting of twelve states,  which is “limited to those States with similar consumer protection laws under the facts not this case.”;   a specific Maryland Class;  and a Nationwide Class.

The states in the first class are California, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts,  Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Oregon, and Washington.

The complaint generally alleges that consumers value gluten-free products for health reasons,  are willing to pay a premium for such products  and would not have purchased the product,  or have paid a premium for the product,  had they known the product contains gluten.  The plaintiff alleges that “On February 22, 2022,  the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced that the Product contains wheat and thus is not ‘gluten free,’” and accordingly, that the FSIS “ordered a recall for approximately 6,000 pounds of the Product that remained in the marketplace.” 

The complaint contains five causes of action:  Violation of State Consumer Protection Statutes (On Behalf of the Multi-State Consumer Class); Violation of the Maryland Consumer Protection Act;  and Breach of Express Warranty,  Breach of the Implied Warranty of Merchantability and Unjust Enrichment,  all on behalf of the Nationwide Class.

On behalf of herself and “all others similarly situated,” plaintiff seeks declaratory,  injunctive and monetary relief,  including punitive damages and “restitution and disgorgement.”

Plaintiff’s counsel is The Keeton Firm LLC.

Exit mobile version