There Should Be a Price to Pay for Knowingly Lying to Consumers
Why TINA.org wants the Supreme Court to address proof of harm in Lanham Act cases.
In June 2014, a federal judge granted a motion to dismiss a class-action lawsuit against Skinny Crisps. The complaint, which was originally filed in 2014, claims that the company mislabels products – including various flavors of Skinny Crisps Low Carb and Gluten Free Gourmet Crackers – as containing “organic dehydrated cane juice” when they actually contain sugar. According to the joint motion to dismiss, the parties settled the named plaintiff’s individual claims in March 2014. We do not know the terms of the settlement. (Agazanof et al v. Skinny Crisps, Inc., Case No. 14-cv-01125, C. D. CA.).
For more information about other class-action lawsuits regarding sugar and TINA.org’s coverage of the topic, click here.
Why TINA.org wants the Supreme Court to address proof of harm in Lanham Act cases.
Letters alert agencies and organizations to company’s improper marketing.
TINA.org discovers some roadblocks to unlocking this purportedly free offer.
New research points to “no.”
Why disclosures are key to protecting informed consumer choice and competition.