Anheuser-Busch
Allegations: Preventing consumers from giving negative reviews on its website and app
March 2016: The Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s decision to dismiss this lawsuit. (In Re: Anheuser-Busch Beer Labeling Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, Case No. 14-3653, 6th Cir.)
June 2014: A federal judge dismissed a class-action lawsuit against Anheuser-Busch. Plaintiffs claimed that the company represents the alcohol content of several Anheuser-Busch beers – including Budweiser, Bud Ice, Michelob, Hurricane High Gravity Lager, and Black Crown – on the product labels when, in reality, the beverage’s alcohol content is lower than the one displayed on the label. The judge dismissed the lawsuit finding that plaintiffs did not allege that the misrepresentations ever exceeded 0.3%, as required by federal regulations. The lawsuit was dismissed with prejudice, meaning that plaintiffs cannot refile. (In Re: Anheuser-Busch Beer Labeling, Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, Case No. 13-md-02448, N. D. OH.).
For more information about other class-action lawsuits regarding the advertising alcohol and TINA.org’s coverage of the issue, click here.
Allegations: Preventing consumers from giving negative reviews on its website and app
Allegations: Falsely advertising the alcohol in Ritas drinks
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing that Veza Sur is a craft beer made in Miami with Latin roots when it is not a craft beer and has no authentic Latin roots and…
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing that beverages are made with agave to make consumers think they contain agave spirits when the ingredients list reveals they actually contain agave syrup as a sweetener
Allegations: Misleadingly marketing that beverages are made with agave to make consumers think they contain agave spirits when the ingredients list reveals they actually contain agave syrup as a sweetener
Allegations: Falsely advertising that beverages don’t contain any alcohol
In September 2020, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Anheuser-Busch for allegedly falsely advertising Ritas™ brand beverages in a way to make consumers think that the Sparkling Margarita beverages contain…
October 2016: This case was voluntarily dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled. as to the named plaintiff and When a complaint is dismissed without…
June 2013: These two cases were transferred to a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in Ohio to be heard with other similar cases. Click here to learn more about the MDL. (In…
March 2017: This case was voluntarily dismissed because the parties entered a confidential settlement agreement. The named plaintiffs’ claims were dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot…
April 2017: Plaintiffs’ petition for en banc review was denied. March 2017: The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s decision to dismiss the lawsuit. The appellate court…
April 2016: The appeal was dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled., the reasons for which have not been disclosed. November 2015: An objector filed…
In December 2014, a state judge preliminarily approved a settlement of a class-action lawsuit against Anheuser-Busch. The complaint, which was originally filed in 2013, claims that the company misleadingly markets…
Lawsuits take aim at so-called non-disparagement clauses.
Several of this year’s Super Bowl advertisers have run into legal trouble for alleged deceptive marketing.
Nick Reynolds, Newsweek
Five class-action settlements that left consumers behind in 2022.
Consumers aren’t the only ones who watch the ads. Competitors do too.