Froot of the Poisonous Tree of Litigiousness

Law

Kevin Underhill at Lowering the Bar alerts us to the latest skirmish in the long, pointless war against kids' breakfast cereals with names that are potentially misleading to exceptionally stupid people.

This time would-be cereal killer Roy Werbel has chosen the United States District Court for the Northern District of California as his venue. In his first purported class action lawsuit, against Kelogg's, Werbel asserts that "Froot Loops" is deceptively packaged and marketed because reasonable people may be misled into believing that it is healthy and associated in some way with fruit, when in fact it is not. Werbel does not specify that he means reasonable people who have been recently kicked in the head by a horse, but that's what I gather.

In his second purported class action lawsuit, this one against PepsiCo, Werbel complains that the product Cap'n Crunch with Crunchberries is deceptively packaged and sold because it does not, in fact, contain berries of any sort. Moreover, Mr. Crunch is not actually a Cap'n, but was dishonorably discharged from the Navy under the Obama Administration's continued and craven pursuit of the Don't Ask Don't Tell policy as merely a Lieut'nt. (Okay, that gripe was mine). Werbel is represented in both suits by Jeffrey Saul Kravitz of Sacramento. Kravitz went to Cal, so one can expect this sort of thing from him. Cal students may well be part of a class of people who think that Crunchberries are actual berries, though in fairness to PepsiCo, Cal students would never support the military-industrial complex by buying Cap'n Crunch products. Cal students are more likely to be deceived by cereal made of fake hemp fibers or flax falsely labeled as fair-trade.

As Kevin points out, these arguments have been rejected, often harshly, by every judge to consider them so far. But that's no barrier to bringing suit in a new district on the same insipid theory. In our system, Kelogg's and PepsiCo will pay at least a hundred grand to get these suits dismissed (if they are lucky), and there will likely be no consequences for Werbel or Kravitz. Federal judges are too timid with both Rule 11 sanctions and vexatious litigant orders.

Our court system is packaged and marketed as promoting actual justice. But nobody with any damn sense believes that, either.

Last 5 posts by Ken

7 Comments

7 Comments

  1. Charles  •  Oct 26, 2009 @9:58 am

    I'd like to think that the motion to dismiss this claim will be a less expensive cut and paste of the prior MTD. And just as the last judge called out the lawyers in the last case for their prior frivolous filing, a third bite at the fake apple may finally be enough to get a judge to sanction counsel.

  2. bill  •  Oct 27, 2009 @5:01 am

    My favorite candy, Bit-O-Honey, will never be sued for deceptive packaging and marketing. Honey is only the eighth ingredient.

  3. Arthur  •  Oct 27, 2009 @10:17 pm

    I actually did think that Froot Loops contained fruit as a kid. Of course, I also thought that Trix contained fruit, despite the name. I was reading by 3, and never thought to read the ingredients on cereal containers. Any rate, one of my aunts always got on my case about how fruit is pure sugar, and therefore no healthier than candy.

  4. Shkspr  •  Oct 28, 2009 @5:08 am

    And the good people who work at Grape-Nuts shudder in advance of the approaching storm…

  5. Doug  •  Oct 28, 2009 @6:49 am

    Not to pick, but its spelled 'Kellogg's". You dropped an 'l'.

  6. Chuck  •  Oct 29, 2009 @12:56 pm

    But what do you think about SF city attorney Herrera firing a warning shot at Kellogg's for potentially misleading SLIGHTLY less stupid people?

    http://food.theatlantic.com/nutrition/san-francisco-vs-cocoa-krispies.php

  7. Don Keefhardt  •  Nov 2, 2009 @12:51 pm

    I've got a bigger target in mind…

    My Blackberry contains neither any real berries nor any fruit-flavorings at all. Bastards. They'll pay……