A federal district judge in Manhattan handed Starbucks a class action lawsuit for selling “Refresher” fruit drinks containing no fruits.

While dismissing two of the eleven petitions by two aggrieved consumers, U.S. district judge, J.P. Cronan, noted the unreasonable lack of fruit ingredients in fruit drinks. 

This gives direction to a case that has been bubbling for at least one year.  In August 2022, Noan Kominis from New York filed a lawsuit against Starbucks for misleading customers with “Refresher” fruit drinks. 

A year later, Noan and Jason McAllister from California have finally convinced the New York judge despite Starbucks’ dismissal offers. The two allege that they bought their “refresher” drinks at “premium prices.” They assert that the lure of the fruity ingredients misled them or otherwise they wouldn’t have made their purchases.

The key “Refresher” fruit drinks in the line of fire include Strawberry Acai Lemonade, Mango Dragonfruit and passion fruit beverages. 

The plaintiffs claim that only water, sweeteners and concentrates of grape juice are present in these drinks.

Notable facts:

• Noan Kominis/Jason McAllister filed the case as a consumer protection litigation. 
• The two allege that the ‘refresher’ line of Starbucks’ drinks have neither mango, acai, nor passion fruit in them.
• They claim that Starbucks charges highly for the drinks (up to $5.95 a cup) on account of the ‘fruit’ ingredients.
• Starbucks dismissed the brief, saying that “no reasonable’ buyer would read more than a flavour in a fruit drink’s name.
• The judge ruled against Starbucks and initiated the lawsuit on the grounds of existing products. He pointed out that Starbucks’ other traditional drinks such as “iced matcha latte” actually incorporate matcha. Therefore, it is only natural that “Refresher” fruit drinks should also have their respective fruits in them.

The attorney of the two consumers, Robert Abiri, pegs the case’s worth at $5 million.

Other Notable Consumer Class Actions

One of the current lawsuits pits California-based customers against Subway Restaurants. The customers claim that the restaurant’s classic tuna sandwich contains more animal ingredients than merely tuna.  Subway chain denies the allegation with the affirmation that their product has only skipjack tuna in it.

Subway also successfully wriggled off another case in 2017 which claimed that it sold its foot-long sandwiches at lesser length. 

The current case against Starbucks on “Refresher” fruit drinks is filed as Kominis et al v Starbucks Corp.