General Mills Sued Over High-Sugar Cereals, Bars
by Tara Voss
Last Updated on July 7, 2022
August 27, 2019 – Lawsuit Dismissed After Judge Says General Mills Provides Truthful Sugar Facts on Product Labels
The lawsuit detailed on this page has been dismissed.
On August 13, 2019, United States District Court Judge Jeffrey S. White granted General Mills Sales, Inc.’s motion to dismiss without leave to file a fourth amended complaint.
Citing a decision handed down in Clark v. Perfect Bar, Judge White wrote that the plaintiffs’ theory on which their case rested—that consumers are deceived and misled by the health-forward marketing and label statements of certain General Mills products—is now an untenable application of the reasonable consumer standard. In Clark v. Perfect Bar, it was determined by the court, Judge White said, that no reasonable consumer would be deceived regarding a product’s sugar content, and whether it may or may not be healthy as a result, when a product’s label “plainly discloses the amount of sugar in the product.”
With the Clark v. Perfect Bar decision in mind, Judge White ruled that the plaintiffs in the suit detailed on this page “cannot plausibly claim to be misled about the sugar content of their cereal purchases” because they were provided all the information they needed to make an informed decision thanks to General Mills’ label disclosures.
“Here too, the actual ingredients were fully disclosed and it was up to the plaintiffs, as reasonable consumers, to come to their own conclusions about whether or not the sugar content was healthy for them,” the dismissal order states.
General Mills Sales, Inc. has been hit with a putative class action lawsuit in California that takes aim at the amount of sugar in its cereals, bars and other food products. The suit claims that despite “compelling scientific evidence” that excessive added sugar can lead to serious health problems, General Mills continues to profit by advertising high-sugar food products alongside health and wellness claims.
The suit calls these claims “deceptive” because they are “incompatible with the dangers of the excessive added sugar consumption to which these foods contribute.” It even goes as far as to say that the prices of these products are higher because of “false and misleading” claims that the products are “nutritious,” “healthy,” and “wholesome.”
The lawsuit points out that excessive consumption of added sugar can increase a person’s risks of heart disease, liver disease, diabetes and even some types of cancer. The list of products named in the suit? There are too many to name, but here are a few of the popular ones:
- Honey Nut Cheerios
- Basic 4
- Reese’s Puffs
- Lucky Charms
- Fiber One Cereal
- Cinnamon Toast Crunch
- Nature Valley Soft-Baked Oatmeal Squares
- Nature Valley Crunchy Granola Protein
You can read the lawsuit here and find out all the products named in the suit.
Here’s a snapshot at some of the claims the suit takes issue with. Take Fiber One’s Raisin Bran Clusters Cereal, for example. The suit alleges that despite the 14 grams of sugar per serving, the cereal is marketed behind a laundry list of health and wellness claims. These include:
- “Whole Grain First Ingredient”
- “Research suggests that people who have a higher fiber intake tend to have healthier body weights.”
- “Lightly Sweetened”
- “We are committed to nourishing lives.”
The suit suggests that the claims on the products are leading consumers to believe the products are “nutritious,” “healthy,” “wholesome,” and can even help with disease prevention and weight loss. Also at issue in the case? General Mills’ claims about the amount of fiber, whole grain and protein in its products and how they provide “fuel” and “energy.” The suit says that these claims distract consumers from the products’ high sugar content.
The suit also claims that General Mills should have known that scientific research has linked high-sugar products to health problems, but failed to warn consumers about these dangers.
The lawsuit alleges violations of California False Advertising Law, the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act and California Unfair Competition Law. The suit seeks to represent a class of California residents who bought any of the General Mills cereals mentioned in the complaint within the last four years.
The suit is Truxel, et al. v. General Mills Sales, Inc. and was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
Hair Relaxer Lawsuits
Women who developed ovarian or uterine cancer after using hair relaxers such as Dark & Lovely and Motions may now have an opportunity to take legal action.
Read more here: Hair Relaxer Cancer Lawsuits
How Do I Join a Class Action Lawsuit?
Did you know there's usually nothing you need to do to join, sign up for, or add your name to new class action lawsuits when they're initially filed?
Read more here: How Do I Join a Class Action Lawsuit?
Stay Current
Sign Up For
Our Newsletter
New cases and investigations, settlement deadlines, and news straight to your inbox.
A note on class action complaints:
Bear in mind that the information in this blog post summarizes the allegations put forth in the following legal complaint. At the time of this writing, nothing has been proven in court. Anyone can file a lawsuit, with or without the representation of an attorney, for any reason, and ClassAction.org takes no position on the merits of the suit. Class action complaints are a matter of public record, and our objective on this website is merely to share the information in these legal documents in an easily digestible way.
Before commenting, please review our comment policy.