Northern California Record

Saturday, August 17, 2019

Consumer claims Krispy Kreme doughnuts do not contain blueberries, maple syrup

By Robert Davis | Apr 13, 2018

LOS ANGELES – Plaintiff Irina Agajanyan filed a class action complaint demanding a jury trial in the U.S. Central District Court of California, alleging that Krispy Kreme Doughnut Corp. intentionally misrepresents its products and commits common law fraud when it sells flavored doughnuts that do not contain the actual flavors represented.

The plaintiff filed the complaint April 6, alleging breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, breach of contract, negligent misrepresentation, violation of the California Consumer Legal Remedies Act and other counts.

According to the complaint, products such as glazed blueberry cake doughnut, glazed blueberry cake doughnut hole, maple iced glazed, strawberry iced and strawberry iced with sprinkles, represent to customers that those flavors are actually in the product. However, those products allegedly do not contain the "real product."

Agajanyan alleges she purchased the blueberry cake doughnut and maple iced glazed doughnut at a Krispy Kreme location in Burbank in July 2017.

The complaint states Agajanyan notified Krispy Kreme on Dec. 8, 2017, via a written letter advising that she had purchased Krispy Kreme's doughnuts, and contrary to the company's representations, the doughnuts do not contain blueberries and maple syrup or maple sugar. 

She alleges Krispy Kreme's purportedly false representations of its products caused her to suffer injury in fact and lose money as a result of purchasing the doughnuts.

This misrepresentation also caused Krispy Kreme to benefit monetarily from the increased sales to the deceived consumers, including Agajanyan and the other class members, she alleges.

Krispy Kreme is alleged to be "a developer, producer, distributor and seller" of the products, according to the suit.

The complaint states that Krispy Kreme was a co-conspirator along with other companies not named in the complaint in misleading the general public about the contents of their products. 

The plaintiff acknowledged that she does not know the other corporations' names, but will amend the complaint once they become known.

Want to get notified whenever we write about U.S. District Court for the Central District of California ?

Sign-up Next time we write about U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, we'll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.

Organizations in this Story

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California