Freedline

Freedline v. O Organics LLC

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaOctober 27, 20203:19-cv-01945California1,607 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 GARY FREEDLINE, Case No. 19-cv-01945-JD

Plaintiff,

ORDER RE NATIONAL CLASS

v. 9 Re: Dkt. No. 32 O ORGANICS et al., Defendants.

12 In this putative class action, plaintiff Gary Freedline alleges that defendants O Organics LLC and Lucerne Foods, Inc., O Organics’ parent company (together, O Organics), misled consumers about the alcohol and sugar content in their kombucha beverage products. Dkt. No. 1. Freedline sued on behalf of a California consumer class and a national consumer class for claims under the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CLRA), the Unfair Competition Law (UCL), the False Advertising Law (FAL), breach of express and implied warranties, negligent misrepresentation, common law fraud, and unjust enrichment. Id. The Court dismissed the unjust enrichment claim with prejudice, and all claims for sugar content with leave to amend. Dkt. No. 27. Freedline chose not to amend, so the sugar claims are now out of the case. The Court declined to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.