Starbucks Fruit Drinks Have No Fruit, Lawsuit Alleges
A New York woman and a California man say Starbucks used deceptive marketing practices to fool them into buying fruitless fruit drinks
On Monday a federal judge in Manhattan said a case alleging that Seattle-based Starbucks sells fruit drinks without any fruit can move forward.
The ubiquitous chain of cafes sought to dismiss the lawsuit, but judge John Cronan of the Southern District of New York will allow the case to proceed.
"A significant portion of reasonable consumers would expect the drinks to contain the fruit mentioned in their names," Judge Cronan wrote in his decision.
Cronan dismissed a portion of the suit alleging fraud on technical grounds, but said that portions of the suit alleging false and deceptive marketing practices can continue.
A New York woman and a California man are suing the coffee giant, claiming they were misled over the fruit content of several Starbucks drinks.
"Despite their names, and unbeknownst to consumers, the Mango Dragonfruit Refreshers and Mango Dragonfruit Lemonade Refreshers contain no mango," reads a complaint filed last year.
The complaint goes on to allege that other fruit drinks do not contain any of the fruit listed in their titles. Those drinks include Strawberry Acai Refresher, Strawberry Acai Lemonade Refresher, Pineapple Passionfruit Refresher and Pineapple Passionfruit Lemonade Refresher.
- Fruit Flies Die Quicker When They See Dead Fruit Flies: Study
- Lunchables are Getting a Fresh Fruit Upgrade
- Trademark Case Pits Apple Against Actual Fruit Growers
- Contaminated Fruit Kills 2: CDC
- Millions of Fruit Flies Are About to Be Dropped from the Skies Over Los Angeles
- Walmart, HEB, and Costco Frozen Fruits Recalled for Hepatitis A Contamination Risk
Joan Kominis, who lives in Astoria, Queens, and Jason McAllister of Fairfield, Calif., say Starbucks duped them into paying for products for the fruitless drinks through false and deceptive marketing.
"Had plaintiff and other consumers been aware that the products are missing one of the named fruits, they would not have purchased the products or paid significantly less for them," the lawsuit says.
In an emailed statement, a Starbucks spokesperson called the allegations in the suit "inaccurate and without merit."
"We look forward to defending ourselves against these claims," the statement said.
In court filings seeking the dismissal of the case, the company said it makes it clear in its menu boards that the drinks contain fruit flavors, rather than actual fruits.
An attorney representing the plaintiffs did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
- Student Loan Servicers That Sent Late Bills to 758,000 Borrowers Get Slapped by the FedsBusiness
- Peloton Stock Surges on TikTok DealBusiness
- Boeing Wants FAA to Clear Smallest 737 Max Jet Despite Overheating ProblemBusiness
- Delta Is the Most On-Time US Airline for Third Year in a Row, Travel-Data Firm SaysBusiness
- Chinese Shadow Bank Files for Bankruptcy as Real Estate Crisis Racks NationBusiness
- The Life and Rise of Chip Wilson, Lululemon’s Controversial Billionaire FounderBusiness
- Where the Jobs Are: These Are the Sectors Doing the Most HiringBusiness
- Furious Customer Confronts Hapless McDonald’s Cashier Over Blue and White McChicken Wrapper, Claims It Shows Support for IsraelNews
- Exxon Mobil Joins Chevron in Blaming California for Billions in Asset ImpairmentsBusiness
- How to Claim Part of Verizon’s Proposed $100 Million SettlementBusiness
- What Did People Who Forgot a Present Do on Christmas Day? Pulled Out Their PhoneBusiness
- Tesla Recalls 1.6 Million EVs in China Over Autopilot Crash RisksBusiness
