Case On Point
Kominis v. Starbucks Corporation
(S.D.N. Y. 2023 )
Plaintiff filed a class action complaint against Starbucks, asserting that various beverage names and promotional practices were misleading and violated consumer protection statutes. As an example, the "Mango Dragonfruit Starbucks Refresher" contained no mango, and consisted primarily of grape juice, water and sugar. Starbucks moved to dismiss, contending that consumers would interpret the product names as referring to the drinks' flavor rather than their ingredients, and that "no reasonable consumer would be misled by the Products’ names into thinking that the Products contain the missing fruit." The court rejected this argument, and denied the motion to dismiss.