Smart SpendingSmart Spending

Lawsuit dropped over Taco Bell beef

The company says it was right all along.

By MSN Money Partner Apr 20, 2011 5:55PM

This post comes from Mark Huffman at partner site ConsumerAffairs.com.

 

It was back in January that an Alabama law firm made headlines by filing a class-action lawsuit against Taco Bell, saying ads describing the ground meat in its tacos as beef were false advertising. The suit maintained the meat was only 36% beef and contained mostly chemicals, powders and starches.

 

That suit has now been voluntarily dropped by the woman who filed it.

 

The litigation, filed by Amanda Obney, claimed the meat contained in Taco Bell's ground beef products did not meet the U.S. Department of Agriculture's standards for beef.

The suit sought to require Taco Bell to properly advertise and label food items, and to engage in a corrective advertising campaign to educate the public about the true content of its food products.

Instead, Taco Bell immediately took to the airwaves with a series of ads vigorously defending its products. In addition to television spots, Taco Bell also took out full-page ads in major newspapers, saying its meat is 88% beef and only 12% "recipe." Post continues after this video, which sheds more light on the dispute:

In dropping the suit, the plaintiff contends Taco Bell has already made the sought-after changes and no further action is required. Taco Bell CEO Greg Creed says no changes were necessary and the record has now been set straight.

"We took great exception to the false claims made about our seasoned beef and wish the attorneys had contacted us before filing and publicizing a lawsuit that disparaged our brand," Creed said in a statement.

 

Taco Bell denied the claims in the suit at the outset and spent a reported $4 million on advertising defending its brand.

 

More on ConsumerAffairs.com and MSN Money:

1Comment
Apr 21, 2011 6:13AM
avatar
Any  press is good press.  They may have spent $4 mil, but I guarantee I went to eat at taco bell out of solidarity and I am positive I'm not alone. 

Its not the best for "health" but as long as it exists I'll eat there.  

I sort of hope that they would sue the litigious individual who started it.   I can't imagine anyone eating at taco bell to improve their health so I do not believe they had any point other than to boost their own notoriety.  Shame on their greedy self. 

YEAH TACO BELL.  I'll have a couple volcano crunchy tacos, and an order of nachos with what I know is not "cheese".   Please!  Smile   If LOL catz ever ate tacos they'd give up cheezeburgerz. 

Report
Please help us to maintain a healthy and vibrant community by reporting any illegal or inappropriate behavior. If you believe a message violates theCode of Conductplease use this form to notify the moderators. They will investigate your report and take appropriate action. If necessary, they report all illegal activity to the proper authorities.
Categories
100 character limit
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?

DATA PROVIDERS

Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.

Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.

ABOUT SMART SPENDING

Smart Spending brings you the best money-saving tips from MSN Money and the rest of the Web. Join the conversation on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

VIDEO ON MSN MONEY

TOOLS

More