At least the judge found that "a reaonsble consumer would know crunchberries are not real fruit."
Judges and juries when so charged should find much more often than they appear to that reasonable consumers would not do or believe a lot of things that are transparently stupid.
Oooohoo!!! For many a sunny morn upon the Emerald Isle have I taken a breakfast of pink hearts, yellow moons, orange stars and green clovers. And has me luck ever changed for even a wee bit? No it has not and it grieves me deeply to tell it. And can you loan me a dollar? I’m a little short. Oooohoo!!!
Not fond of brightly colored cereal, I haven't a clue as to how long this cereal has been on the market, but I do have some sympathy for the litigant. When I started cooking with Martha Stewart, I learnt of more berries than I'd dreamt existed. Ligonberries, anyone? Also called cowberry, foxberry, mountain cranberry, csejka berry, red whortleberry, lowbush cranberry, mountain bilberry, partridgeberry and redberry.
Then again, didn't we all start reading ingredient labels long ago?
Apparently she sued after four years of eating the cereal and she suddenly figured out that crunchberries were not real fruit.
I was part of the original marker testers for Count Chocula, Booberry and Frankenberry. I was a young child and I didn't think there were real berries in those cereals...
"Judge England also noted another federal court had "previously rejected substantially similar claims directed against the packaging of Fruit Loops [sic] cereal, and brought by these same Plaintiff attorneys." He found that their attack on "Crunchberries" should fare no better than their prior claims that "Froot Loops" did not contain real froot."
Thanks to Wikipedia, the answer appears to be since 1967.
"Cap’n Crunch Crunch Berries. A version of the cereal was created in 1967 and also contained spherical pieces in red, intended to represent berries, and a mascot was introduced called the Crunch Berry Beast."
Via Lawshucks: The best part of the opinion is where we learn that someone had already made the same claims against Fruit Loops.
For these same reasons, another California district court has previously rejected substantially similar claims directed against the packaging of Fruit Loops cereal, and brought by these same Plaintiff attorneys. See McKinnis v. Kellogg USA, 2007 WL 4766060 (C.D. Cal. 2007) (rejecting each argument pursued here).
"Judge England also noted another federal court had "previously rejected substantially similar claims directed against the packaging of Fruit Loops [sic] cereal, and brought by these same Plaintiff attorneys." He found that their attack on "Crunchberries" should fare no better than their prior claims that "Froot Loops" did not contain real froot."
I am a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for me to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
Encourage Althouse by making a donation:
Make a 1-time donation or set up a monthly donation of any amount you choose:
२६ टिप्पण्या:
Lawyers .....aah, the hell with it.
At least the judge found that "a reaonsble consumer would know crunchberries are not real fruit."
Judges and juries when so charged should find much more often than they appear to that reasonable consumers would not do or believe a lot of things that are transparently stupid.
I think I remember crossing a playground once and being asked by one of my more physically aggressive schoolmates, "Do you like crunchberries?"
Had I said "yes," which I didn't, now there would be grounds for a lawsuit.
Oooohoo!!! For many a sunny morn upon the Emerald Isle have I taken a breakfast of pink hearts, yellow moons, orange stars and green clovers. And has me luck ever changed for even a wee bit? No it has not and it grieves me deeply to tell it. And can you loan me a dollar? I’m a little short. Oooohoo!!!
Essex county, England
WARNING LABEL
Be forewarned that the county of Essex does not in fact have any more sex in it than anywhere else.
The village of Finchingfield, in Essex county, does not guarantee finches are present, nor that one can engage in finching.
Coldharbour can be cold, but is not always cold.
Great Baddow is not, in fact, great.
Leigh-on-Sea does not cause one to be able to lay on the sea.
Shellow Bowels does not permit display of one's bowels in public.
Saffron Walden has no more saffron than anywhere else.
Thank you for not suing.
Vodka and Crunchberry anyone?
Wait until she discovers horse apples are not really apples.
Crunchberry: animal, vegetable or mineral?
Look out Frankenberry
Crunchberries aren't real fruit! No wonder I couldn't find them in the Burpee catalogue.
Not fond of brightly colored cereal, I haven't a clue as to how long this cereal has been on the market, but I do have some sympathy for the litigant. When I started cooking with Martha Stewart, I learnt of more berries than I'd dreamt existed. Ligonberries, anyone? Also called cowberry, foxberry, mountain cranberry, csejka berry, red whortleberry, lowbush cranberry, mountain bilberry, partridgeberry and redberry.
Then again, didn't we all start reading ingredient labels long ago?
The amount she demanded was $5 billion.
I guess if you're going to go to all that trouble and fill out all those forms you might as well dream big.
So did she think the "Oops All Berries" of the 80's were really fruit salads in a box?
The Cap'n needs to leave and put the kids in charge again. Now that would be a throwback product I could get behind.
My career at General Mills lasted exactly one day. They don’t laugh at dingleberry jokes.
Apparently she sued after four years of eating the cereal and she suddenly figured out that crunchberries were not real fruit.
I was part of the original marker testers for Count Chocula, Booberry and Frankenberry. I was a young child and I didn't think there were real berries in those cereals...
"Judge England also noted another federal court had "previously rejected substantially similar claims directed against the packaging of Fruit Loops [sic] cereal, and brought by these same Plaintiff attorneys." He found that their attack on "Crunchberries" should fare no better than their prior claims that "Froot Loops" did not contain real froot."
California, what a hoot.
Turns out that Mist'r Crunch isn't a real Cap'n either.
-The Other Jeremy
> Turns out that Mist'r Crunch isn't a real Cap'n either.
Actually, he once captained a rowboat on a lake. That's loophole enough.
Christy:
Thanks to Wikipedia, the answer appears to be since 1967.
"Cap’n Crunch Crunch Berries. A version of the cereal was created in 1967 and also contained spherical pieces in red, intended to represent berries, and a mascot was introduced called the Crunch Berry Beast."
Did the plaintiff eat a bushel of dingleberries thinking they're real fruit, too?
What the hell is wrong with these attention-seeking headcases, anyway?
Can a judge literally throw the book at someone? Preferably a thick hardcover one.
Her other lawsuit now pending against Hormel is for tricking her into eating pork in their meat product by saying it only contained hot Dog.
Via Lawshucks: The best part of the opinion is where we learn that someone had already made the same claims against Fruit Loops.
For these same reasons, another California district court has previously rejected substantially similar claims directed against the packaging of Fruit Loops cereal, and brought by these same Plaintiff attorneys. See McKinnis v. Kellogg USA, 2007 WL 4766060 (C.D. Cal. 2007) (rejecting each argument pursued here).
LOL!
"Judge England also noted another federal court had "previously rejected substantially similar claims directed against the packaging of Fruit Loops [sic] cereal, and brought by these same Plaintiff attorneys." He found that their attack on "Crunchberries" should fare no better than their prior claims that "Froot Loops" did not contain real froot."
Froot... LMAO!
Aw, dammit, Penny beat me to it. >:-{
In other breaking news, it is revealed that Lucky Charms are not, in fact, "magically delicious", merely delicious.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा