Legal Opinion
In re Truvia Natural Sweetener Marketing & Sales Practices Litigation
United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
Decided February 12, 2014No. MDL No. 2512PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING TRANSFER
Before the Panel: * Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, defendant Cargill, Inc., moves to centralize this litigation in the District of Minnesota. This litigation currently consists of four actions pending in the Southern District of Florida, the District of Hawaii, and the District of Minnesota, as listed on Schedule A. The cases in this litigation involve allegations that Car-gill misleadingly labels and markets its Truvia Natural Sweetener products (Tru-via) as “natural,” when, according to the plaintiffs: (1) Truvia is primarily made from erythritol, which is produced…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- The Cadle Company v. Whataburger of Alice, Inc. M. Louise Andrews Kathy A. Reese Herbert E. Pounds, Jr. George P. Braun and Joe Alvin Andrews, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1999
- In re Best Buy Co.United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2011
- In re Gerber Probiotic Products Marketing & Sales Practices LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2012
- Fire Eagle L.L.C. v. Bischoff (In Re Spillman Development Group, Ltd.)Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2013
- In re Schnuck Markets, Inc.United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2013
3Cited by2 opinions
- In re Natrol, Inc., Glucosamine/Chondroitin Marketing & Sales Practices LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2014
- In re Epipen (Epinephrine Injection, USP) Employee Retirement Income Security Act (Erisa) LitigationUnited States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation · 2017