Lead plaintiff Dyami Myers-Taylor claims in the Kerrygold class action lawsuit that the milk that makes up the high-end butter is made from cows that eat various grains, including soy and corn.
However, alleges the plaintiff, the company touts its expensive product as made from milk derived from "grass-fed" cows.
"Plaintiff purchased one or more of the Kerrygold products at a premium price and would not have made the purchases had he known the labeling was false, deceptive, and/or misleading," states the Kerrygold butter class action lawsuit.
According to the Kerrygold class action lawsuit, consumers are aware that milk and other dairy products, like butter, derived from grass-fed cows tastes better, contains more nutrients, and is perceived as healthier.
The Kerrygold butter class action alleges that consumers will pay a premium for dairy products advertised as made from milk from grass-fed cows.
"The positive effects of grass-fed butter are real - studies show that in areas where cows are grass-fed, individuals who ate the most high-fat dairy products had a substantially lower risk of death from cardiovascular disease," alleges the Kerrygold class action lawsuit.
"Many consumers intentionally avoid products derived from grain fed cows, and the advertising and labeling of the Kerrygold products is misleading in that plaintiff and similarly situated consumers are unable to exercise their right to choose grass-fed products."
Kerrygold, says the plaintiff, attempts to capitalize on the premium prices consumers are willing to pay. However, alleges the Kerrygold class action lawsuit, the milk the company uses is from cows that are not grass-fed year-round.
"The grass-fed claims made by the defendant regarding the Kerrygold products are false, misleading and deceptive. During certain times of the year, Kerrygold feeds its cows genetically modified and other grains - not grass - such that the resulting products are not strictly 'grass-fed,'" alleges the Kerrygold butter class action lawsuit.
The Kerrygold class action lawsuit seeks to represent consumers who purchased Kerrygold butter starting in June 2014.
The plaintiff says the false advertising violates California business and consumer protection laws, and also constitutes fraud, negligent misrepresentation and breach of warranty. Myers-Taylor is seeking a jury trial.
The Kerrygold class action lawsuit claims that the company should pay compensatory and punitive damages and the court should issue an order requiring Kerrygold to "correct, destroy, and change all false and misleading labeling and website terms relating to Defendants' statements and representations."
The plaintiff also wants Kerrygold to disgorge all profits from the alleged false advertising.
Myers-Taylor and the proposed Class are represented by Ross Cornell of the Law Offices of Ross Cornell APC and Reuben D. Nathan of Nathan & Associates APC.
The Kerrygold Butter Class Action Lawsuit is Dyami MyersTaylor v. Ornua Foods North America Inc., et al., Case No. 3:18-cv-01538, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.
Comment: Fat sources from grass-fed animals are far nutritionally superior to their grain-fed counterparts. As such, many knowledgeable consumers will make efforts to seek out, and pay a premium for, grass-fed sources of meat and dairy products. That Kerrygold has, allegedly, been misinforming their customers on the source of the animal feed for their products is essentially a scam. It's like labeling 10K gold as 24K in order to be able to charge more. That they are targeting the health-conscious, and in many cases people who are trying to deal with serious disease, makes it all the more shameful.
See also: