Iced Drinks Lawsuit against Starbucks Emphatically Dismissed by California Federal Judge
A federal judge in California last Friday emphatically dismissed a preposterous would-be class action that alleged Starbucks deceived customers by underfilling its iced beverages with liquid and overfilling them with ice.
As reported by Law360, U.S. District Judge Percy Anderson cited, among other things, even young children’s understanding of ice displacing liquid in dismissing with prejudice the plaintiff’s claims under California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act, Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law.
“If children have figured out that including ice in a cold beverage decreases the amount of liquid they will receive, the court has no difficulty concluding that a reasonable consumer would not be deceived into thinking that when they order an iced tea, that the drink they receive will include both ice and tea and that for a given size cup, some portion of the drink will be ice rather than whatever liquid beverage the consumer ordered,” Judge Anderson wrote.
“When a reasonable consumer walks into a Starbucks and orders a Grande ice tea, that consumer knows the size of the cup that drink will be served in and that a portion of the drink will consist of ice. Because no reasonable consumer could be confused by this, Plaintiff fails to state CLRA, UCL, or FLA claims.”
Judicial Hellholes reporters would have liked to see Judge Anderson go on to find plaintiffs’ attorneys Justin Farahi and Raymond M. Collins of the Farahi Law Firm APC in contempt for so audaciously and selfishly wasting taxpayer-provided court resources with such a nonsense lawsuit. A month in jail for these shameless shysters might have had the salutary effect of discouraging similar litigation, such as the putative national class action filed in Illinois federal court that also alleges Starbucks deceptively underfills its cold drinks, and two separate actions in New York and California alleging the same with respect to certain hot drinks.
Too bad there aren’t more judges like Judge Anderson. Then parasites like Farahi and Collins might be forced to get real jobs that could actually benefit society. Meanwhile, Starbucks attorneys should seek fees and costs and move for sanctions against these sorry excuses for plaintiffs’ attorneys.
