JMPL Won’t Consolidate Truvia Class Action Lawsuits

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

On Wednesday, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) refused to consolidate four proposed class action lawsuits accusing Cargill Inc. of misleadingly labeling its Truvia Natural Sweetener products because the cases are likely to be transferred to one location.

The Truvia class action lawsuits, which were filed in Florida, Hawaii and Minnesota federal courts, accused Cargill of misleadingly labeling and marketing its Truvia products as “natural” when they contain processed ingredients. Specifically, the plaintiffs allege that Truvia is primarily made from erythritol, a substance produced through the fermentation of corn-derived dextrose. They also allege the stevia leaf extract, a major focus of Cargill’s advertising, is actually obtained through extensive processing with a variety of toxic chemicals.

Two class action lawsuits are pending in Hawaii federal court, and are currently subject to a pending motion filed by Cargill to transfer them to Minnesota. The first Truvia class action lawsuit was filed in Hawaii, and a subsequent California Truvia class action lawsuit was transferred to Hawaii federal court based on the first-to-file rule. The Florida plaintiffs have filed a motion requesting transfer to the District of Hawaii. A federal judge has ordered the Minnesota plaintiffs to show cause as to why that class action lawsuit should not be dismissed or transferred to Hawaii based on the first-to-file rule.

Cargill moved to centralize the litigation in the district of Minnesota. While their motion was supported by the Minnesota plaintiffs, the plaintiffs from the other states did not support consolidation of the lawsuits. The JPML declined to consolidate the Truvia class action lawsuits after determining it was likely that they would be transferred to a single location, eliminating the need for multidistrict litigation (MDL).

Because there are already several transfer motions pending, the JPML believes the class action lawsuits will eventually be transferred to either the District of Hawaii or the District of Minnesota. “Though these actions share common questions of fact as to whether the labeling and marketing of Truvia as ‘natural’ is false or misleading, there exists a reasonable prospect that the resolution of the pending transfer motions could eliminate the multidistrict character of these actions,” the JPML wrote.

In September, Cargill agreed to a proposed $5 million class action settlement, which would have resolved the Minnesota Truvia lawsuit. However, the proposed Truvia settlement was rejected after a Minnesota federal judge found there was no indication in the record that the Hawaii plaintiffs had been advised that a settlement had been reached. The judge expressed concern about the fact that the settlement was reached so soon after the class action lawsuit was filed and that the parties did not provide an opportunity for plaintiffs in the other pending lawsuits to object.

The plaintiffs are represented by Beck & Lee Trial Lawyers, Scott & Scott LLP and Reese Richman LLP, among others.

The Truvia False Advertising Class Action Lawsuit is In re: Truvia Natural Sweetener Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, Case No. 2512, in the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.

UPDATE: Instructions on how to file a claim for the Truvia class action settlement are now available! Click here or visit www.TruviaSweetenerLawsuit.com for details.

UPDATE 2: A federal judge granted final approval to the Truvia class action settlement on Nov. 26, 2014.

UPDATE 3: Payments from the Truvia class action settlement were mailed to eligible claimants the first week of May.