News Packaged Food Products

Potato Chip Company Sued For Filling Bags With Excessive Air

You know that depressing feeling you get when you open up a plump bag of chips, only to find that a bunch of air has deceived you as to how many chips are exactly in the bag?

While that’s normal for many chip manufacturers, one company may be filling theirs with more air than everybody else. At least, that’s what this lawsuit alleges.

The class-action lawsuit was filed in the Southern District of New York federal court. Plaintiffs Sameline Alce and Desiré Nugent allege that the chip company Wise Foods Inc. only fills their bags one third of the way with chips, with the rest being air.

Alce and Nugent claim that other chip manufacturers don’t fill their bags with nearly as much air, and even use smaller bags to fill larger volumes than what Wise Foods uses.

Technically, air can be put into chip bags thanks to FDA regulations that allow for its usage to protect the product inside. However, it appears that Wise Chips is still mislabeling its bags compared to other products by having so much air inside.

The internet has taken notice of Wise Chips as well, taking to Twitter with pictures showcasing their complaints.

It’s obvious that this isn’t just a problem that two people noticed and decided to sue for. The internet isn’t happy with this, either.

If Alce and Nugent win, Wise Foods would have to repackage their chips with much less air and face charges of up to $1,500 per violation. Considering how many chips they make, that’s a lot of money they’d have to cash out if they lose.

Fast Food News Restaurants

Robot Restaurant Eatsa Sued For Being ‘Inaccessible To Blind Customers’

A post shared by eatsa (@eatsarestaurant) on

High-tech restaurants are great… until they neglect to service the disabled, too.

Trendy “robot restaurant” chain Eatsa was just sued in federal court for being “entirely inaccessible to blind customers,” according to the Disability Rights Advocates (DRA).

The non-profit legal center is representing the American Council of the Blind and blind New Yorker Michael Godino, who is representing a group of blind patrons that are unable to access and order food at Eatsa on their own. The lawsuit was filed in the Southern District of New York this morning.

A post shared by eatsa (@eatsarestaurant) on

For those of you unfamiliar, Eatsa is a restaurant with no employee-customer interactions. Instead, guests order on touchscreen kiosks or on a mobile app and pick up their food in glass cubbies when it’s ready.

This ordering system inherently discriminates against blind people because the touchscreen kiosks lack audio or tactile aids to assist blind customers in ordering. The app isn’t compatible with screen reader technology that could help blind people, and frames cover up any audio jacks or buttons needed for accessibility. While an employee can be requested for assistance, to do so requires pressing a button on the already inaccessible kiosk.

Blind customers couldn’t even pick up their food because the cubbies visually light up when a customer’s food is ready, and no other audio aids exist to inform customers that their food is served.

The lawsuit claims that the audio and tactile technology that could be used to assist blind individuals exists already, but Eatsa is just not using it.

“Eatsa designed and implemented its inaccessible, self-service dining system despite the existence of readily available accessible technology that could have provided the audio output and tactile input blind customers need to be able to utilize Eatsa’s mobile application, tablet ordering system, and cubby-based food pick-up system independently. “

As a result of these issues, the DRA and its plaintiffs are suing for an injunction to prevent Eatsa from further discriminating against persons with disabilities and for the chain to develop a system where blind customers can independently access its restaurants.

Alcohol Hit-Or-Miss News

Kona Brewing Co. Accused of Being Phony, Gets Sued

Screen Shot 2017-03-01 at 5.08.00 PM

There’s nothing worse than finding out something isn’t really what you thought it was. So, you can imagine how Kona Beer lovers felt once they discovered their beloved Longboard Island Lager, wasn’t actually being brewed on the island.

In fact, a lawsuit filed by Sara Cilloni and Simone Zimmer, claim that Kona Brewing Co., a company under the Oregon-based brewing company Craft Brew Alliance, actually manufactures their beer in New Hampshire, Oregon, Tennessee, and Washington State, according to the St. Louis Dispatch.

The suit alleges that Kona Brewing Co. is using Hawaiian themes, including images of “hula dancers, surfers,” and volcanoes among other imagery, to encourage consumers to purchase their beer at a higher price.

The St. Louis Dispatch wrote that the class-action lawsuit was filed March 1, in a San Jose, Calif. federal court and is seeking,”unspecified damages for Kona purchasers in that state and nationwide over four years.”

This isn’t the first time seemingly falsified labeling on beer became the subject of legal action. In February, Wal-Mart was sued over selling a contracted non-craft beer at a premium craft beer price, under a brewery that simply didn’t exist.

Packaged Food Sweets

Here Is Why You NEVER See Fruit On A Fruit Roll-Ups Box

Fruit Roll-Ups were a huge part of our childhoods. We remember cracking open our lunch bags and finding a colorful pack of rolled up sugar to get us through the second half of the school day. Have you ever wondered why the you never actually see pieces of fruit in the pacakaging of the popular children’s snack?

A lawsuit that was decided in 2012 challenged General Mills’ claim that the item was “made with real fruit” since flavors like Strawberry Naturally Flavored Fruit Roll-Ups contained no actual strawberries.

Instead, the fruit-flavored snack boasts pear puree concentrate, corn syrup, dried corn syrup, sugar, partially hydrogenated cottonseed oil, and about 2 percent or less of natural artificial ingredients.

According to presiding judge, US District Judge Samuel Conti, reasonable consumers might be misled by the snack’s packaging and probably wouldn’t read the fine print.

Because of the suit, the new labels will not depict any fruits that aren’t actually in the snack. For example, a strawberry-flavored Fruit Roll-Up made from pear puree would not be able to show any strawberries in the packaging.

Makes sense.

Next time you’re perusing through the snack aisle at your local grocery store, take note at all the different flavors Fruit Roll-Ups offers and the packaging that goes along with them. Don’t see too many pieces of fruit on those boxes, do you?

Don’t get us wrong, they’re still delicious though. Anything with corn syrup usually is.

Alcohol Beer Drinks News Products

Walmart Just Got Sued For Selling Fake Craft Beer

A post shared by Kirs Arends (@wanderingbeer) on

If you bought one of Walmart’s craft beers, you may have been ripped off.

The giant retailer is being sued for deceiving consumers by selling them a line of private-label “craft beers” that aren’t actually craft beer.

Walmart claims that their line of craft beers was developed in conjunction with a craft brewing company called Trouble Brewing, according to The Consumerist. However, the only Trouble Brewing company that was found was an Irish brewery that doesn’t match up to any of the information Walmart gave about the company producing their craft beers.

The company in Walmart’s paperwork for the alcohol is called WX Brands, and they develop all types of alcohol for brands around the world. They clearly don’t fit into the legal definition of craft beer, which requires production of less than 6 million barrels of beer per year and less than 25% of a non-craft brewer to own it.

However, Walmart puts up their craft beers, which include their Cat’s Away IPA, After Party Pale Ale, Round Midnight Belgian White, and Red Flag Amber beers, next to all of the other craft beers in the store — which further distorts the customer’s image that the beers are in fact actual craft beers.

Because the beers are available in Walmarts across 45 different states, there’s a good chance you saw it and thought it was a craft beer when it in fact wasn’t. If you bought the product, you were also getting deceived by Walmart, who was able to sell the beer for a higher price because it was a “craft beer” that is perceived to be worth more.

As a result, a class-action lawsuit has been brought against Walmart by a group of residents from Ohio, who are looking for compensatory and punitive damages as well as an injunction to prevent the labeling of the beers as craft beer.

The plaintiffs are calling the marketing of the beers “wholesale fiction,” and I couldn’t think of a better way to describe what Walmart is doing.

Hopefully, this makes Walmart stop defrauding the public with its “craft beers.”


Pizza Delivery Man Wins $4.4 Million Settlement After Being Shot 14 Times By Police

Being a pizza delivery driver can be a little terrifying if you think about it. Your job is to drive all around the city and hope nothing sketchy happens to you when you knock on that door.

For Philippe Holland of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, his nightmare didn’t consist of getting attacked by some hungry customer during his delivery. He didn’t even get tied up 30 Minutes or Less-style. No folks, the poor guy was actually shot by police officers who mistook him for an gunman back in 2014.

According to the Associated Press, the officers were in plain clothes and walked up to Holland. In a panic, Holland didn’t believe that they were really officers, and felt they were just trying to rob him. He got in his car, tried to drive off to safety, and was shot 14 freakin’ times.

Holland now has a permanent seizure disorder and chronic pain stemming from his injuries, which led him to sue the city of Philadelphia, getting $4.4 million in a settlement, on January 6.

The officers didn’t go unpunished. Well, at least not completely unpunished, as they are now on desk duty. They were not charged with a crime themselves, though.

Much respect to delivery drivers.

Hopefully we see less stories like this, and more stories like the one below:

Fast Food News

Chipotle Faces $2 Billion Lawsuit For Allegedly Using Photo Of Woman Without Permission


This is probably not the best way for Chipotle start off the year, but the burrito bowl maven is in the middle of another lawsuit. This time, a woman is suing the fast-casual chain for more than $2 billion for using an image of her in a promotional photo she says Chipotle had no permission to use.

According to Grubstreet, Leach Caldwell of California is seeking a least $2,237,633,000 from the company for a photo taken by a food photographer Steve Adams in 2006. Caldwell alleges that Adams took a photo of her eating at a Denver Chipotle.


Caldwell refused to sign a form to use that image after her encounter with him, but discovered eight years later that the image of her was used as promotion at a Florida Chipotle store in 2014. Additionally, alcohol was digitally added to Caldwell’s photo in front of her.

Chipotle founder and CEO Steve Ells and Adams are named as defendants of the suit. The specific amount in her suit is a reflection of the company’s profits from 2006-2015.

Fast Food Hit-Or-Miss News

McDonald’s Lawsuit Claims Value Meals Aren’t Really A Value

As its always stood, McDonald’s is meant to be fast and inexpensive. But if things like their Extra Value Meals are actually costing you more money than they should, then that’s a problem.

James Gertie is suing McDonald’s, claiming the Extra Value Meal at his local Chicago McDonald’s costs 41 cents more than it would to buy each item individually, according to Consumerist.

The lawsuit claims that a-la-carte, two burgers cost $2.50, fries cost $1.99, and the drink is usually $1, for a grand total of $5.49. Cool. Except all those items cost $5.90 when packaged in the Value Meal.

You might think 41 cents is not a big deal, but if true, that Extra Value Meal at this McDonald’s was still ripping off customers.

The goal of the lawsuit is to refund customers who have bought the Extra Value Meal, plus punitive damage.

In an attempt to test the price difference claim, Business Insider found a similar result in New York, saying that Postmates has a two cheeseburger Extra Value Meals for $5.99, but buying the items individually came out to $5.86, a difference of 13 cents.

I tried it through Postmates myself, using our local McDonald’s in Santa Ana, California, but I found that you save 17 cents with the Extra Value Meal. It’s not much of an extra value, but at least it’s not a complete hustle.

So this pricing dilemma doesn’t seem to be a company-wide thing. It might just be terrible mathematicians putting together bad deals at certain locations. We’ll just have to wait and see how it all plays out, but if something screwy did occur, I genuinely hope everyone gets back their 41 cents.