“Yet Another Lawsuit About the Lack of Fruit in ‘Froot Loops'”

Lowering the Bar has details on the latest California case alleging fraud. Food Liability Law Blog wonders whether it and the related Crunchberry suit will make for an “endless loop” of courtroom activity. Earlier here, etc.

P.S. Don’t miss our funny reader comments on this one.


  • I misread this as referring to “Fruit of the Loom”. Made about as much sense.

  • Next up, a suit complains that Janitor in a Drum (http://www.instaoffice.com/janitor-drum-heavy-duty.94365jd.0.7.htm) does not contain an actual janitor.

  • 1. Loser pays.

    2. Disbarment for filing such ridiculous lawsuits.

  • No rabbit meat in chocolate rabbits.

  • And no dragon meat in Dragon brand sausage as I have discussed here.

  • @Roy, LOL

    I want to sue the underwear company as the underpants, shorts, panties, bras, t-shirts, vests, and camisoles contain no fruit and are, in point of fact, inedible altogether. These items are not even made of fruit leather like that edible underwear stuff sold by Frederick’s of Hollywood.

  • No cherries in Cherrios… erm…

  • Is there bomp in the Bompbopopbomp’a?
    and what about Ram in the Ramalama dingdong?

  • Image my disappointment when I discovered no Girl Scouts in the Girl Scout Cookies!

  • Or baby in Baby Oil.


  • No turtles in Turtle Wax!

  • Peter, really?

  • The suit loses on its face. The question is not, “Is their Fruit in Froot Loops?” It is, “Is there ‘Froot’ in Froot Loops.”

  • Who ever filed this should be hauled out and summarily executed. What a flipping waste of time.

    And where is the baby in baby food. Or the gator’s in Gatorade?

  • Where is chicken in “Chicken of the Sea?”

    (Maybe Jessica Simpson can join in on the lawsuit!)

  • After reading all these replies I feel I’ve been told there’s no Santa Claus all over again. Talk about bursting my bubble(s).

  • Fortunately manufacturers of gummy bears have nothing to fear since each gummy bear contains the meat of a real black bear that has chewed and swallowed lots of gum.

    Seriously, the Plaintiff’s attorney should review, at a minimum, the West Group Publishing title, “Class Actions and Other Multi-Party Litigation in a Nutshell,” though the pages of that book are not actually shipped in the outer shell of a nut. Wait!??! Is that another class action? I want my Nutshell series pages shipped in a saliva soaked Brazil nut nutshell!

  • I went to Panda Express and was horrified to find out that they actually do not serve any panda meat. So I walked across the street to Grandma’s restaurant and not one Grandma on the premises.

    What has this world become?

  • Who do I talk to about the lack of pee in these peanuts?

  • What about the more in moron?

  • Imagine the shock of finding your Panama hat was made in Ecuador?

  • I was deeply disappointed that the “tart” in Pop Tarts was not what I thought…

  • I went to Pizza Hut and was disappointed that the building was not an actual hut.

    A local pizza place called Blackmarket Pizza serves pizza that is not in fact illegal. It is served openly, is health inspected, and the cops know where it is.

  • Imagine the surprise when I found out an Italian leather sofa contained no genuine Italians. Almost as disappointing was when I learned that no Naugas are used in the production of Naugahyde.
    I was shocked, shocked!! I tell you.

  • I learned that no Naugas are used in the production of Naugahyde.

    I used to sell office furniture as a summer job. We would have people ask where “Naugahyde” came from and what animal was used to produce it. An artist friend of mine came up with a drawing of a “Nauga Bird.” The company’s framing studio put the drawing in a nice frame and we started showing people the picture. After awhile, some one wanted to buy it as it was “special.”

    We asked the artist what she wanted for the piece and we sold it with both the artist and the company making money. She drew another. It sold as well. In my three summers at the store, I think we sold 20 or so of these drawing of “Nauga Birds.” It was by far the most popular art work we sold.

  • Who wants to join in the Baby Oil class action

  • I worked at Uniroyal (actual maker of Naugahyde) in South Bend Indiana in the late ’60s and they sold small stuffed toys covered with Naugahyde, calling them Naugas. I still have two of them, so don’t tell me “no Naugas are used in the production of Naugahyde”. I’ve got proof! :).

  • I went to Pizza Hut and was disappointed that the building was not an actual hut.

    To be fair, that’s not actually pizza either, so it evens out.

  • Barney – you have a second cause of action on those Pop Tarts. The didn’t use pop in them either. No coke, Pepsi, sprite, Dr pepper or any other soda (aka pop in certain parts of the country.). Sue em back into the stone age!

  • Honestly! A suit over Fruit Loops?

    How about going after confectioners who make Marshmallows? I’m sure there’s no MARSH ingredients in those things đŸ˜‰

  • Grape Nuts are still legit though right?

  • Ah, Muddypaws, there’s a sad tale. The Marsh Mallow is an actual plant that was once, seriously, used to make the French confection which is the basis for marshmallows. Once upon a time housewives made marshmallows from scratch at home using parts of the marsh mallow plant. The mallow-free store boughten confection is named for the plant that was once but is no more the basiss for marshmallows.
    Perhaps somebody should sue.

  • ROFL

  • Seriously,
    What about the Pop Tarts which are not made of fruit?

    Should a company market its product touting ingredients which dont exist?

    Why can this company list the content of the product as real fruit, when in fact it is not?

    Next time I buy a sandwich at Chick-fil-A that is labeled as an all white meat chicken filet, should I care if the meat turns out to instead be flavored soy protein?

    Hoping the corporate idolizers on this site dont want us to go that far in excusing business fraud.

  • Well, you might learn to read and practice the skill. Then you might notice what the list of ingredients on boxes are. This could help prevent you from buying and consuming things that you don’t wish to.

    Or you could could simply label anyone who disagrees with you a ‘corporate idolizer’. When what you probably mean is ‘corporation idolizer’. But as the distinction would mean you were capabble of reading a dictionary, your vituperation is noted.



  • My apologies to the majority here for the spelling errors. As Lawyer apparently cannot read, no apology is extended to him.