Oct22

spooky or just kooky?

Posted on by
Standard

Hershey wins lawsuit arguing halloween candies weren’t spooky.

A federal judge ruled that some popular Halloween candies are a treat, not a trick. The judge dismissed a misleading advertising lawsuit against The Hershey Company. They were accused of tricking customers who got disappointing candies when they bought Halloween versions of Reese’s products.

The suit targeted nine Reese’s products, from pumpkins and ghosts to bats and footballs. They claimed that they received blank Reese’s candies when they expected ones with pumpkin faces, ghost eyes, and bat details.

Two Florida men, Nathan Vidal and Eduardo Granados, were seeking at least $5 million in damages, Reuters reported.

“Vidal was very disappointed and would not have purchased the Reese’s  products if he knew that they did not have the detailed carvings of the mouth and/or eyes as pictured on the products’ packaging,” the suit said.

US District Judge Melissa Damian ruled that the treats not being spooky enough doesn’t prove economic harm.

“Put simply, the plaintiffs do not allege that the products were unfit for consumption, did not taste as the plaintiffs expected, or otherwise were so flawed as to render them worthless,” Damian wrote “Rather, the plaintiffs allege that they were “disappointed” that the products they purchased did not have the detailed carvings pictured on the product packaging.”

—

‘whoever tells the best story wins.’

-john quincy adams

 

—

source credits: chris spiker, daily news, Reuters, hershey candy company

 

Discover more from I didn't have my glasses on....

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

72 responses »

  22. Ditto all of the above comments. I hope these two men were humiliated right out of their spooky socks. But I highly doubt it…anyone who would sue a company for such a ridiculous thing for that much money probably doesn’t have much of a conscience to humiliate..or brain. Chris

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply ↓

  29. Okay, maybe a person could ask for their money back for the candy, but even that is a stretch. This reminds me of a story I read about a thief who fell through the roof of a store while trying to rob it and had the gall to sue the store owners.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply ↓

  31. Funny, I literally had a bag of those pumpkin shaped Reese’s in my hand an hour ago but ended up choosing $100 Grand instead.

    Not so funny? Frivolous lawsuits like this one. What a waste of the court’s and the taxpayer’s time. I want to reverse sue them for being ridiculous.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply ↓

  33. That’s so hilarious! I heard once (years ago) about someone complaining to the manufacturer that they didn’t get any sweets of a particular kind in their packet of mixed and they were sent a replacement packet – but going to court!

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply ↓

  36. Pingback: Emunctory Hot Links – Tacky Raccoons

Leave a reply to petespringer Cancel reply