View Full Version : Woman sues Jelly Belly, claiming she didn't know the beans contain sugar
Down1
25th May 2017, 04:24 PM
They tricked her !
Gomez claims the company tricked her into thinking the tiny beans contain juice rather than sugar, by listing "evaporated cane juice" as an ingredient. She alleges the company highlights that its carbohydrate, electrolyte and vitamin content to suggest the product has "healthy characteristics," according to court documents.
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Jelly-Belly-woman-sues-claiming-Sports-Beans-sugar-11173122.php
http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Jelly-Belly-woman-sues-claiming-Sports-Beans-sugar-11173122.php
crimethink
25th May 2017, 04:43 PM
"Attorneys (((Thomas [Wolfe] Kohler))) and Ryan Ferrell of Apex Trial Law."
Farrell is the owner, and (((Kohler))) is the actual trial lawyer.
Complaint as filed in the San Bernardino County Superior Court (now removed to Federal District Court in Los Angeles, per Jelly Belly request, due to Class Action nature):
https://www.foodlitigationnews.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2017/03/Gomez-v.-Jelly-Belly-Candy-Co.-Complaint.pdf
Removal petition (response):
https://www.truthinadvertising.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Gomez-v-Jelly-Belly-Candy-Co-notice-of-removal-and-complaint.pdf
C.Martel
25th May 2017, 04:43 PM
So the "woman" is demanding the company to switch to GMO sugar beets because she is uninformed.
By gosh, we should all follow suit, demand companies to switch from healthier non-GMO foods to unhealthy GMO foods. Let me guess, she drinks diet soda too. We should all be so smart to drink unhealthy diet soda like her. Hum... what is evaporated cane juice? From a sugar cane, no sugar in that, that's for sure, I'll take twenty please.
A picture of this overweight "woman" would be fitting. Women should not vote or be able to ruin society with their stupidity.
(Fixed it because a jew is handling the "woman")
ximmy
25th May 2017, 04:47 PM
https://cdn-us-ec.yottaa.net/559d843c312e586950002fbe/www.jellybelly.com/v~13.e9/resources/images/footer-static/mrJB_verticalImage.jpg?yocs=Y_&yoloc=us
crimethink
25th May 2017, 04:59 PM
So the woman is demanding the company to switch to GMO sugar beets because she is uninformed.
No, she is seeking a payout from deep pockets because of her ignorance. If the lawyers were honest (LOL), they'd have told her she had no case.
Women should not vote or be able to ruin society with their stupidity.
That is an unreasonable assumption.
The Jew lawyer is male. As are most class-action lawyers.
madfranks
25th May 2017, 07:32 PM
It's candy for Hitch's (Pete's) sake, of course it's not healthy.
crimethink
25th May 2017, 07:37 PM
It's candy for Hitch's (Pete's) sake, of course it's not healthy.
She should have stated another cause of action: Product Caused Unwanted Weight Gain.
Glass
25th May 2017, 08:25 PM
I wonder what her understanding of juice is. Juice can be many things.
Anyway, lawyers like most people, will take your money if you insist. In this case it might not be fair to hold them in contempt.
crimethink
25th May 2017, 08:44 PM
I wonder what her understanding of juice is. Juice can be many things.
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/000/054/432/20k9o3s.jpg
Anyway, lawyers like most people, will take your money if you insist. In this case it might not be fair to hold them in contempt.
Most likely this is a contingency case, with no money unless they win. And 50% of it if they do.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.