Skip to main content
Subscribe

Case tracker

Food contaminant lawsuits

By · Published · Last updated

Lawsuits and enforcement involving glyphosate, pesticides, PFAS, heavy metals, solvents and outbreaks. Every entry links to a court docket or a major outlet, and I check for new filings and rulings every week.

Restaurant chains

Labelling (sugar) · Consumer class action

Starbucks

Walsh v. StarbucksUS District Court, SeattleFiled 2 Oct 2026

Alleges eight protein lattes and matcha drinks sold as "sugar-free" contain 13 to 21 g of sugar per venti, from milk lactose. This is the recent matcha issue; it concerns labelling, not contamination. Starbucks says the claims have no merit.

Latest: Just filed.

Everything on Starbucks

Sources:[61] nbcconnecticut.com (opens in a new tab)[38] settlementinsight.com (opens in a new tab)

Open
  1. Filed (current stage)
  2. Motion stage
  3. Proceeding
  4. Closed

Pathogen (Cyclospora) · Personal injury and class actions

Taco Bell and Taylor Farms

Cyclospora outbreak suitsMahoning County, Ohio; E.D. Michigan; C.D. and N.D. CaliforniaMultiple, incl. Koss v. Taco BellFiled 17 Jul 2026

The CDC linked shredded iceberg lettuce served at Taco Bell to 1,644 Cyclospora infections and 94 hospitalizations in Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Kentucky and West Virginia (May–Jul 2026). The lettuce was traced to one supplier in Mexico.

Latest: Several individual suits and proposed class actions filed Jul–Aug 2026.

Everything on Taco Bell

Sources:[48] fox19.com (opens in a new tab)[62] clickondetroit.com (opens in a new tab)[49] jurislawgroup.com (opens in a new tab)[50] jurislawgroup.com (opens in a new tab)

Open
  1. Filed (current stage)
  2. Motion stage
  3. Proceeding
  4. Closed

Solvents (decaf) · Consumer class action

Starbucks

Williams v. StarbucksUS District Court, W.D. Washington2:26-cv-00112Filed 13 Jan 2026

Alleges Starbucks hid that its Decaf House Blend contains residues of methylene chloride, benzene and toluene, and that its "100% ethically sourced" claim is false. Proposed class: buyers in Washington and New York. Starbucks says the allegations are inaccurate.

Latest: Starbucks moved to dismiss; oral argument was set for 27 Oct 2026. No ruling reported yet.

Everything on Starbucks

Sources:[40] pacermonitor.com (opens in a new tab)[38] settlementinsight.com (opens in a new tab)[39] dailycoffeenews.com (opens in a new tab)

Open
  1. Filed
  2. Motion stage (current stage)
  3. Proceeding
  4. Closed

Solvents (decaf) · Consumer class action (Canada)

Starbucks Coffee Canada and Starbucks Corp.

Proposed class actions in BC and QuebecSupreme Court of British Columbia; Quebec Superior CourtFiled 2026

Repeat the US claims about decaf solvents and ethical sourcing for Canadian buyers. The BC case covers buyers outside Quebec.

Latest: Proposed only; not yet certified.

Everything on Starbucks

Sources:[38] settlementinsight.com (opens in a new tab)

Open
  1. Filed (current stage)
  2. Motion stage
  3. Proceeding
  4. Closed

Pathogen (E. coli) · Personal injury and class action

McDonald's (and Taylor Farms)

Quarter Pounder E. coli outbreak suitsVarious, incl. US District Court, N.D. IllinoisMultipleFiled 23 Oct 2024

The CDC counted 104 cases, 34 hospitalizations and 1 death in 14 states (Sep–Oct 2024), likely from slivered onions supplied by Taylor Farms. Individual suits and a proposed class action followed.

Latest: Outcome not verified.

Everything on McDonald's

Sources:[47] en.wikipedia.org (opens in a new tab)

Outcome not verified
  1. Filed (current stage)
  2. Motion stage
  3. Proceeding
  4. Closed

Pathogen (E. coli) · Personal injury

Meritage Hospitality (Wendy's franchisee)

Meyers v. Meritage HospitalityKent County Circuit Court, MichiganFiled Sep 2022

Part of a 2022 E. coli outbreak (97 cases by Sept 2022) linked to sandwich romaine at Wendy's in Indiana, Michigan, Ohio and Pennsylvania.

Latest: Outcome not verified.

Everything on Wendy's

Sources:[51] clickondetroit.com (opens in a new tab)

Outcome not verified
  1. Filed (current stage)
  2. Motion stage
  3. Proceeding
  4. Closed

PFAS (packaging) · Consumer class action

Burger King

Cooper v. Burger KingUS District Court, OhioFiled 14 May 2022

Similar PFAS packaging claims under consumer-protection, warranty and unjust-enrichment law; no physical injury alleged.

Latest: Outcome not verified.

Everything on Burger King

Sources:[63] americanbar.org (opens in a new tab)

Outcome not verified
  1. Filed (current stage)
  2. Motion stage
  3. Proceeding
  4. Closed

PFAS (packaging) · Consumer class action

Burger King

Hussain v. Burger KingUS District Court, N.D. CaliforniaSee docketFiled Apr 2022

Alleged "real ingredients" and sustainability marketing hid PFAS in packaging.

Latest: Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case on 22 Aug 2022 without prejudice, so it could be refiled.

Everything on Burger King

Sources:[45] courtlistener.com (opens in a new tab)[43] packaginginsights.com (opens in a new tab)

Voluntarily dismissed
  1. Filed
  2. Motion stage
  3. Proceeding
  4. Voluntarily dismissed

PFAS (packaging) · Consumer class action

McDonald's

Clark v. McDonald's (and McDowell v. McDonald's)US District Court, S.D. Illinois, transferred to N.D. IllinoisFiled 28 Mar 2022

Alleges McDonald's packaging exposed customers to PFAS despite its food-safety pledges. A near-identical suit (McDowell) was filed in N.D. Illinois two days later. No physical injury alleged.

Latest: In 2023 the court moved the case to N.D. Illinois without ruling on dismissal. Later outcome not verified.

Everything on McDonald's

Sources:[43] packaginginsights.com (opens in a new tab)[44] studicata.com (opens in a new tab)

Outcome not verified
  1. Filed
  2. Motion stage (current stage)
  3. Proceeding
  4. Closed

Pathogen (norovirus) · Federal criminal case

Chipotle

United States v. Chipotle Mexican GrillUS District Court, Los AngelesFiled 21 Apr 2020

Charges tied to at least five outbreaks from 2015 to 2018, including 234 sickened in Simi Valley in 2015.

Latest: Chipotle agreed to a $25M fine, the largest in a US food-safety case, under a deferred prosecution agreement.

Everything on Chipotle

Sources:[52] cbsnews.com (opens in a new tab)

$25M criminal fine
  1. Filed
  2. Motion stage
  3. Proceeding
  4. $25M criminal fine

Pesticide (DDVP) · Personal injury and consumer class action

Starbucks

Fox v. Starbucks and customer suitUS District Court, S.D.N.Y.; NY Supreme Court (customers)1:19-cv-04650Filed 21 May 2019

Pest-control contractors, a former employee and customers alleged Manhattan stores used Hot Shot No-Pest Strips, which release the pesticide DDVP, near food for about three years. Starbucks said the strips broke company policy and an outside expert found no risk.

Latest: In 2020 the federal judge let the contractors' claims proceed and dismissed the employee's distress claim. Later outcome not verified.

Everything on Starbucks

Sources:[41] nbcnews.com (opens in a new tab)[42] topclassactions.com (opens in a new tab)

Outcome not verified
  1. Filed
  2. Motion stage
  3. Proceeding (current stage)
  4. Closed

Packaged food brands

Glyphosate · Consumer class action

Bimbo Bakeries (Arnold, Brownberry, Oroweat)

Szabla v. Bimbo BakeriesUS District Court, N.D. IllinoisFiled Aug 2026

Alleges 200 ppb and 214 ppb glyphosate in two multigrain breads.

Latest: Just filed.

Sources:[50] jurislawgroup.com (opens in a new tab)

Open
  1. Filed (current stage)
  2. Motion stage
  3. Proceeding
  4. Closed

PFAS (pesticides) · Consumer class action

Driscoll's

Berlinger v. Driscoll'sUS District Court, N.D. CaliforniaFiled Jul 2026

Alleges conventional strawberries carry PFAS-related compounds and fluorinated pesticide residues.

Latest: Just filed.

Sources:[49] jurislawgroup.com (opens in a new tab)

Open
  1. Filed (current stage)
  2. Motion stage
  3. Proceeding
  4. Closed

Glyphosate · Consumer class action

Bob's Red Mill

Frankel v. Bob's Red MillUS District Court, San FranciscoFiled Apr 2025

Alleges steel-cut and rolled oats are marketed as healthy despite glyphosate. Cites EWG's finding that 31 of 45 oat products exceeded its 160 ppb children's benchmark.

Latest: Pending; no ruling reported.

Sources:[54] courthousenews.com (opens in a new tab)

Open
  1. Filed (current stage)
  2. Motion stage
  3. Proceeding
  4. Closed

Pesticide (chlormequat) · Consumer class action

Quaker Oats

Fitzgerald v. Quaker OatsUS District Court, S.D. New York7:24-cv-01235Filed 20 Feb 2024

Alleges failure to warn about chlormequat, a plant-growth regulator, with nearly 300 ppb reported in Old Fashioned Oats.

Latest: Outcome not verified.

Sources:[55] classaction.org (opens in a new tab)

Outcome not verified
  1. Filed (current stage)
  2. Motion stage
  3. Proceeding
  4. Closed

Glyphosate · Consumer protection suit

General Mills (Nature Valley)

Beyond Pesticides et al. v. General MillsDC Superior CourtFiled 2023

Tests found 0.45 ppm glyphosate in granola bars labelled "Made with 100% Natural Whole Grain Oats". That is below the EPA's 30 ppm limit for oats.

Latest: Settled July 2025: General Mills dropped the "100% natural" claim and admits no wrongdoing.

Sources:[53] grainews.ca (opens in a new tab)

Settled: label change
  1. Filed
  2. Motion stage
  3. Proceeding
  4. Settled: label change

Courts and regulators

Glyphosate · Petition enforcement

US EPA

EWG v. EPAUS Court of Appeals, D.C. CircuitFiled 20 Apr 2026

Asks the court to force the EPA to answer a 2018 petition to ban glyphosate as a pre-harvest drying agent and cut the oat limit from 30 ppm to 0.1 ppm. The oat limit was 0.1 ppm in 1993.

Latest: Pending.

Sources:[56] thenewlede.org (opens in a new tab)

Open
  1. Filed (current stage)
  2. Motion stage
  3. Proceeding
  4. Closed

Glyphosate · US Supreme Court

Monsanto (Bayer)

Monsanto v. DurnellUS Supreme CourtFiled 2026

Roundup cancer case. The question was whether state failure-to-warn claims survive when the EPA approved the label.

Latest: 25 Jun 2026: the Court held federal pesticide law preempts such claims, per Bayer's release. This limits Roundup injury suits, not food-labelling suits.

Sources:[57] bayer.com (opens in a new tab)

Decided 7–2 for Monsanto
  1. Filed
  2. Motion stage
  3. Proceeding
  4. Decided 7–2 for Monsanto

The rules every entry follows

Court record first
Court, filing date and docket number where public, linked to the docket or a major outlet that reports it.
Allegations stay allegations
Claims are worded as alleged until a court rules or the company settles.
Outcomes get equal weight
Dismissals and settlements are added as prominently as filings. “Outcome not verified” means I couldn’t confirm a later status.
Context for scale
Each case links to the chain page, its lab findings and the legal limits.

Update log

  • First research pass: 19 cases, 23 lab findings across 19 chains, 5 viral claims checked; new-protein products and label names added.

Get my 1-page apple-water starter cheat sheet, free.

Plus one email when a new episode is out. Nothing else.