Parents Sue Sprout Foods Over Baby Food Misbranding

Gillian and Samuel Davidson filed a complaint against Sprout Foods Inc seeking recompense for Sprout’s alleged deceptive and unlawful practices in their labeling and marketing of baby and toddler food products. The complaint alleges that the defended misbrands its baby and toddler food products by making nutrient content claims strictly prohibited by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), as well as misleading purchasers into believing the products are healthier than other products for children.

Sprout products are marketed and intended for children under two; many of these products are baby food “pouches” with packaging making nutrient content claims. According to the complaint, FDA regulations prohibit certain nutrient content claims for children under two. According to these regulations, the claims can be expressed or implied. The complaint alleges the products in question explicitly state on their labels “intended for 12 months & up” or “8 months & up.”

The defendant is accused of violating the false advertising provisions of Sherman Law with reference to specific articles addressing false advertising, misbranding, and the selling of falsely branded products.

The plaintiffs claim they purchased Sprout baby food products because of the nutrient content claims on the packaging, and that the plaintiffs would have not bought—or, at least, paid less for—Sprout products without the misleading marketing.According to the complaint, the plaintiffs seek an order temporarily and permanently enjoining the defendant from continuing the unlawful business practices alleged, an award of compensatory, statutory, punitive, treble damages, and restitution.  The plaintiffs are represented by Gutride Safier LLP.