Try our Advanced Search for more refined results
- Law360
- Law360 UK
- Law360 Pulse
- Law360 Employment Authority
- Law360 Tax Authority
- Law360 Insurance Authority
- Law360 Real Estate Authority
- Law360 Healthcare Authority
- Law360 Bankruptcy Authority
- Products
- Lexis®
- Law360 In-Depth
- Law360 Podcasts
- Rankings
- Regional Powerhouses
- Law360's MVPs
- Women in Law Report
- Law360 400
- Diversity Snapshot
- Practice Groups of the Year
- Rising Stars
- Titans of the Plaintiffs Bar
- Sections
- Adv. Search & Platform Tools
- About all sections
- Browse all sections
- Banking
- Bankruptcy
- Class Action
- Competition
- Employment
- Energy
- Expert Analysis
- Insurance
- Intellectual Property
- Product Liability
- Securities
- Beta Tools
- Track docs
- Track attorneys
- Track judges
Werdebaugh-v-Blue Diamond Growers
Case Number:
5:12-cv-02724
Court:
Nature of Suit:
Multi Party Litigation:
Class Action
Judge:
Firms
Companies
Sectors & Industries:
-
December 16, 2014
Damages Model Dooms Class In Almond Milk Labeling Suit
A California federal judge on Monday decertified a statewide class of consumers alleging Blue Diamond Growers' almond milk product labels misleadingly referred to sugar as "evaporated cane juice," saying that the plaintiff failed to provide an accurate model to show damages.
-
May 27, 2014
Calif. Class Wins Certification In Almond Milk Labeling Row
A California federal judge on Friday certified a class of California consumers who claimed Blue Diamond Growers' almond milk product labels misleadingly referred to sugar as "evaporated cane juice," but refused to certify a nationwide class, finding that the claims of consumers in other states would pose different legal questions.
-
October 03, 2013
Blue Diamond Can't Shake Almond Milk Labeling Class Action
A California federal judge on Wednesday rejected Blue Diamond Growers' bid to dismiss a putative class action brought by a consumer who says the company's "all natural" labels on almond milk products are deceptive and unlawful, finding that the argument for dismissal "misses the mark."