Defendant's Attorney: Not Available

Description: New York City, New York personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendants on product liability theories.

Defendants manufacture and sell POM Wonderful® 100% Pomegranate Juice drink (“the Product”) at mass market retailers and grocery stores throughout the United States. Doc. 24 (First Amended Class Action Complaint (“FAC”) ¶¶ 4, 22. Hernandez alleges that she purchased and consumed the Product on numerous occasions at various retail stores in New York, New York in July 2022.

She purchased the Product relying upon the representations set out in Defendants' labelling and marketing materials that the Product was “safe for use and was a 100% juice beverage containing ‘All Natural' ingredients.” Id. ¶ 88. Defendants' representations with respect to the Product include:

■ He front label of the product describes it as an “Antioxidant Superpower.”

■ He cap on the Product reads “ 100% POMEGRANATE JUICE” and lists the slogan “Drink It Daily. Feel It Forever.”

■ He back label states the Product includes “4 CALIFORNIA POMEGRANATES,” “No Sugar Added,” and “100% JUICE FROM 4 CALIFORNIA POMEGRANATES ALL NATURAL.”

■ He only ingredient listed on the Product's packaging is “100% pomegranate juice from concentrate.”

■ Defendants' website represents that the Product is “Tree to Table” and links to scientific studies purporting to demonstrate that the Product is a healthy choice for consumers.

■ Defendants' social media campaigns for the Product also emphasize that the Product is a source of antioxidants, and consumers can “[s]upercharge [their] health with antioxidants” from the product. .

Contrary to Defendants' representations that the Product is all natural, however, Hernandez alleges that it actually contains per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (“PFAS”), which are synthetic chemicals harmful to humans and the environment. Id. ¶¶ 1-3, 34-35. PFAS are also sometimes referred to as “forever chemicals” because they bioaccumulate, or build up in the body over time, but are harmful even in small doses. Because PFAS are, by definition, man-made, they are not “natural.” Id. ¶ 35. Hernandez's independent testing in July 2022 detected material levels of PFAS in the Product, including: 2.5 parts per trillion (“PPT”) of 1H, 2H, 2H-perfluorooctane sulfonic acid and 6.5 PPT of perfluoro-n-pentanoic acid, which Hernandez alleges is above guidance from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) as to acceptable levels of PFAS in drinking water. Although Hernandez tested the Product,[1] it was not the particular bottle(s) that she purchased and consumed, meaning she could only allege that it “is plausible that [her] Product contained PFAS.”

Had Hernandez known that the Product contained PFAS, she would not have purchased it or would have paid less for it, and she alleges she therefore suffered and continues to suffer economic injuries. Id. ¶¶ 88-90.

Outcome: Motion to dismiss granted.

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: