Amanda Groves Discusses Jury Verdict Impact in False Advertising Case

Amanda Groves, head of Winston & Strawn’s Charlotte Litigation Practice, was quoted in articles by the Daily Journal and Food Navigator USA regarding her perspective on the recent jury verdict in the POM Wonderful v. The Coca-Cola Company case.

In the Daily Journal article “After Long Litigation, an LA Jury Sides with Coke Against POM Wonderful in False Advertising Claims Case,” Ms. Groves notes that the verdict gives attorneys a rare example of what a jury thinks about false advertising claims and may discourage the plaintiffs’ bar before they start litigating an expensive case.

There are many misleading advertising cases dismissed before trial, so the verdict confirms what attorneys have been seeing at the law and motion level, she said.

“It's hard to tell as you’re litigating the case and going through all the motions, there’s no substitute for seeing what a jury comes out with,” Ms. Groves said.

In the Food Navigator USA article “POM Loses False Advertising Case vs. Coca-Cola; Case Offers ‘Rare Glimpse’ Into How Jurors Regard Such Claims, Say Lawyers,” Ms. Groves warns that she would not underestimate the impact of the verdict.

“There are hundreds of similar suits filed by the plaintiffs’ bar on behalf of consumers, alleging that labels ‘misled’ consumers into paying a price premium for the products. With the exception of a defense jury verdict in Allen v. Hyland’s late last year, there are virtually no jury verdicts in this space,” she said.

“The verdict in the POM v. Coca-Cola case is therefore significant and a potential setback for plaintiffs’ lawyers pursing similar claims against the food industry. The POM verdict shows that juries in fact are willing to take reasonable, common sense approaches to these issues,” Ms. Groves added.