Fraud Claims Trimmed from Bigelow Tea Mislabeling Class Action

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.

Fraud claims alleging that R.C. Bigelow Inc. overstated the purported health benefits of its tea products have been dismissed from a class action lawsuit against the company.

Lead plaintiff Adam Victor of California filed the class action lawsuit in June 2013 against Bigelow, one of the largest tea producers in the United States, alleging that the health claims Bigelow makes about the antioxidants in some of its teas are overstated and unlawful under the California Unfair Competition Law. The class action lawsuit alleged that the amount of antioxidants found in Bigelow’s teas, including Constant Comment, Caramel Chai, Lemon Lift, White Chocolate Obsession, and others, is not enough to produce any health benefits even though Bigelow indicates the tea “delivers healthy antioxidants.”

Bigelow argued in a motion to dismiss that Victor could not establish that Bigelow’s health claims about the teas were fraudulent because Victor agreed the teas delivered antioxidants. Bigelow also argued that the lawsuit’s claims that Bigelow’s labeling of the teas is unlawful should be dismissed because Bigelow’s statements about antioxidants present in the teas are not fraudulent. U. S. District Judge William H. Orrick agreed with Bigelow, dismissing Victor’s fraud claims. However, the judge allowed claims that Bigelow’s statements were unlawful to remain.

“[T]he [First Amended Complaint (FAC) still fails to explain what is false or misleading about the phrase ‘delivers healthful antioxidants’” the judge ruled. He explained, “[t]he FAC does not provide any new factual allegations and any new allegations are conclusory,” and “Victor argues that the challenged statement ‘is misleading, in and of itself, because it promises to deliver a healthful dose of antioxidants to any consumer who drinks the tea,’” however, “Victor does not argue that the challenged products do not in fact have antioxidants at all or that any antioxidants are not healthful — indeed, Victor’s counsel stated at the hearing that he does not deny that the challenged products have antioxidants.”

Orrick also explained that “[t]he crux of Victor’s claims is that any antioxidants in the challenged products do not meet FDA-approved levels.” However, although “[t]he challenged products’ labeling may be unlawful in the sense that they do not meet FDA regulations,” Orrick explained further in his order, “there is nothing about the claim that makes it, ‘by its very nature, misleading.’”

The lead plaintiff, Adam Victor, is represented by Ben F. Pierce Gore of Pratt & Associates and by J. Price Coleman of the Coleman Law Firm.

The Bigelow Tea Mislabeling Class Action Lawsuit is Victor v. R.C. Bigelow Inc., Case No. 3:13-cv-02976, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

UPDATE: On June 8, 2016, Bigelow requested summary judgment to secure a quick ruling in its favor in a proposed class action lawsuit against the company that alleges Bigelow misleads consumers with health claims about antioxidants in its teas.

UPDATE 2: On July 8, 2016, the plaintiff argued that it would be premature to dismiss his tea labeling lawsuit at this point. Victor claimed that Bigelow is trying to force him to prove his entire case before it even reaches trial.