Sixlets Maker Accused of Underfilling Candy Boxes
by Erin Shaak
Last Updated on May 8, 2018
Green v. Sweetworks Confections, Llc
Filed: February 1, 2018 ◆§ 1:18cv902
Sweetworks Confections, LLC is facing a proposed class action lawsuit that claims the candy maker underfills its boxes of Sixlets candy and deceives consumers into paying for a product that contains less than what they think they’re getting.
Sweetworks Confections, LLC is facing a proposed class action lawsuit that claims the candy maker underfills its boxes of Sixlets candy and deceives consumers into paying for a product that contains less than what they think they’re getting. The suit alleges that the candy boxes contain a significant amount of “slack-fill,” or “unnecessary empty space,” effectively tricking consumers into “paying for air.” According to the complaint, Sixlets candy boxes contain approximately 60 percent slack-fill, which is not apparent to consumers until they open the packaging.
Further, the defendants allegedly sell Sixlets in another box that is smaller and contains less slack-fill. Therefore, the suit argues, the company “cannot plausibly argue that it could not fit the candy in the Product box into a smaller box, because it has already done exactly this, placing the same quantity of candy in a box that is approximately half the size.”
An image from the complaint has been included below:
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
Stay Current
Sign Up For
Our Newsletter
New cases and investigations, settlement deadlines, and news straight to your inbox.
Before commenting, please review our comment policy.