Luckyguy wrote:I only read the first installment in the series, but that's some bad-ass journalism. Hats off to whoever gave this reporter the time and space to tell this story.
If you have noticed the guacamole at a taco spot looking and tasting a little more watery than your standard runny, but still rich taqueria guacamole, it’s because it probably never had any avocado in it, to begin with.
bw77 wrote:Hewn: "Hand Forged Artisan Bread" Hand made? I believe so. Artisan? I would say yes. Delicious? Certainly. Forged? Not unless you break your teeth on it. I've seen a forge. Bread is not forged.
bw77 wrote:Hewn: "Hand Forged Artisan Bread" Hand made? I believe so. Artisan? I would say yes. Delicious? Certainly. Forged? Not unless you break your teeth on it. I've seen a forge. Bread is not forged.
Jazzfood wrote:my hero
G Wiv wrote:Jazzfood wrote:my hero
Rock ON!
JoelF wrote:To few people's surprise, Blue Diamond Smokehouse Almonds aren't smoked in a smokehouse, they've got "natural hickory smoke flavor".
I consume a heck of a lot of these... but plaintiff in the case is claiming the packaging is deceptive, the judge agrees enough for it to go to trial.
thetrob wrote:JoelF wrote:To few people's surprise, Blue Diamond Smokehouse Almonds aren't smoked in a smokehouse, they've got "natural hickory smoke flavor".
I consume a heck of a lot of these... but plaintiff in the case is claiming the packaging is deceptive, the judge agrees enough for it to go to trial.
This is the problem with the American legal system. The fact the the courts waste time on cases like these are ridiculous and a burden. This is a frivolous case at its base, the only people who may benefit being the lawyers. You can see the basics here: https://www.classaction.org/media/colpi ... rowers.pdf
It's a class action suit with the class being anyone in the US who has consumed Smokehouse Almonds. For arguments sake, lets say they win, what is the award for everyone in the class, a couple of bucks at the most, while the lawyers take their considerable cut.
Whether intentionally deceptive or not, who was harmed by that deception?
spinynorman99 wrote:thetrob wrote:JoelF wrote:To few people's surprise, Blue Diamond Smokehouse Almonds aren't smoked in a smokehouse, they've got "natural hickory smoke flavor".
I consume a heck of a lot of these... but plaintiff in the case is claiming the packaging is deceptive, the judge agrees enough for it to go to trial.
This is the problem with the American legal system. The fact the the courts waste time on cases like these are ridiculous and a burden. This is a frivolous case at its base, the only people who may benefit being the lawyers. You can see the basics here: https://www.classaction.org/media/colpi ... rowers.pdf
It's a class action suit with the class being anyone in the US who has consumed Smokehouse Almonds. For arguments sake, lets say they win, what is the award for everyone in the class, a couple of bucks at the most, while the lawyers take their considerable cut.
Whether intentionally deceptive or not, who was harmed by that deception?
The system is actually working. The cause may be stupid but the system is not. The class mechanism is appropriate where it's not worth any one person's resources to take legal action but collectively there's a worthwhile common goal. This is clearly not the best example but there are plenty of cases where companies are being enriched at the expense of consumers. No sane person would sue over a dollar but that doesn't mean the offender shouldn't be held accountable.
thetrob wrote:spinynorman99 wrote:thetrob wrote:JoelF wrote:To few people's surprise, Blue Diamond Smokehouse Almonds aren't smoked in a smokehouse, they've got "natural hickory smoke flavor".
I consume a heck of a lot of these... but plaintiff in the case is claiming the packaging is deceptive, the judge agrees enough for it to go to trial.
This is the problem with the American legal system. The fact the the courts waste time on cases like these are ridiculous and a burden. This is a frivolous case at its base, the only people who may benefit being the lawyers. You can see the basics here: https://www.classaction.org/media/colpi ... rowers.pdf
It's a class action suit with the class being anyone in the US who has consumed Smokehouse Almonds. For arguments sake, lets say they win, what is the award for everyone in the class, a couple of bucks at the most, while the lawyers take their considerable cut.
Whether intentionally deceptive or not, who was harmed by that deception?
The system is actually working. The cause may be stupid but the system is not. The class mechanism is appropriate where it's not worth any one person's resources to take legal action but collectively there's a worthwhile common goal. This is clearly not the best example but there are plenty of cases where companies are being enriched at the expense of consumers. No sane person would sue over a dollar but that doesn't mean the offender shouldn't be held accountable.
I have no problem with bringing suit, whether individual or class action, when there IS a worthwhile common goal. My issue is with cases like this and the time and resources that are wasted on them. People have sued because Froot Loops don't actually contain fruit, that Chobani Greek yogurt isn't made in Greece, or by Greek people (ignoring that Greek indicates a "style" of yogurt) that ginger ale doesn't contain actual ginger, and on and on. These are not cases based on misleading advertising, misrepresentation of ingredients, intentional mislabeling or claims of nutritional or health benefits. As I asked originally, who was harmed because your "Smokehouse" almonds were smoke flavored not actually produced in a smokehouse.
You want to file suit because people were harmed, or could have been, based on misinformation or misleading labeling, then by all means do so. You want to sue because Red Bull didn't give you wings, or because Popeyes gave you a spork instead of a knife and you choked, then sorry, stop wasting everyone's time.
Katie wrote:Self-checkout doesn't save you time, doesn't save stores money, and doesn't reduce labor costs. It increases theft, and it may make you sick. ‘Unexpected item’: how self-checkouts failed to live up to their promise