Too Little Milkfat in Nips “Rich & Creamy” Caramel Candy Class Action

Should a caramel candy described as “Rich & Creamy” contain a significant amount of milkfat? The complaint for this class action says yes. It brings suit against Ferrara Candy Company for its Nips brand hard caramel candy, which it says does not contain an appropriate amount of milkfat for a caramel candy and the association with cream.

Two classes have been defined for this action:

• The Illinois Class is all persons in Illinois who bought the product during the applicable statutes of limitations.
• The Consumer Fraud Multi-State Class is all persons in Arkansas, Iowa, Michigan, Wyoming, Montana, Nebraska, Virginia, Georgia, and West Virginia who bought the product during the applicable statutes of limitations.

The first page of the complaint shows an image of the Nips candy box, showing the word “Caramel” on a large banner and, in a smaller but still noticeable font, the words “Rich & Creamy.”

The complaint lists several definitions of the word “caramel.” For example, Macmillan Dictionary says a caramel is a “candy made from sugar, butter, and milk.” Britannica Dictionary says a caramel is a “light brown candy made from butter, sugar, and milk or cream.” The milk or cream ingredient is repeated in each of the definitions.

The complaint alleges that milkfat is “the most significant ingredient in caramel, responsible for texture, body, and flavor” and that it “provide[s] unique flavors by carrying lipid-soluble volatile compounds like ketones and aldehydes.” Also, it claims, “Dairy fat ingredients are described as ‘rich’ and ‘creamy’ because they contain[] hundreds of lactones, or aroma compounds, which contribute to taste receptors in the mouth.”

Page 3 of the complaint reproduces the ingredient panel for the product. After corn syrup and sugar, the next two ingredients are “Reduced Fat Milk (Milk, Skim Milk)” and then “Hydrogenated Coconut Oil.”

The complaint alleges, “While the ingredients include ‘Reduced Fat Milk’ consisting of whole and skim (nonfat) milk, the Product’s fat content is almost exclusively provided by the third ingredient, ‘Hydrogenated Coconut Oil.’” The complaint alleges that the oil is “close to 90% fat, whereas reduced fat milk contains 2% fat.”

The complaint then displays the nutrition facts panel, which shows that the product contains 10mg of calcium. It then calculates the amount of fat in reduced fat milk, and draws the conclusion about the product that “ninety percent of its fat content[] is from hydrogenated coconut oil, the only other ingredient with any fat.”

It therefore asserts that the product substitutes hydrogenated coconut oil for the milkfat expected in a caramel. While the product does contain whey, another milk product, the complaint alleges that whey “is almost entirely protein” and that the whey “is added for cost savings over more expensive milk fat ingredients.”

The complaint alleges, “It is false, deceptive and misleading to describe a product as ‘Caramel,’ with the prominent terms[] “Rich & Creamy,’ because consumers will expect it is made with the standard dairy ingredients, based on milkfat.”

Article Type: Investigation
Topic: Consumer
Tags: Deceptive Advertising, Deceptive Labels, Does Not Contain Implied Ingredients, Lower-Quality Item Sold as Higher Quality