Joan Kominis et al v. Starbucks Corporation

The lawsuit, Joan Kominis v. Starbucks Corporation, is a class action complaint brought by Plaintiff Joan Kominis on behalf of herself and others similarly situated. The lawsuit alleges that Starbucks engaged in false and deceptive practices by marketing and selling its Starbucks Refresher Products as containing specific fruits when they did not. The products in question include Mango Dragonfruit Lemonade Starbucks Refreshers, Mango Dragonfruit Starbucks Refreshers, Strawberry Acai Lemonade Starbucks Refreshers, Strawberry Acai Starbucks Refreshers, Pineapple Passionfruit Lemonade Starbucks Refreshers, and Pineapple Passionfruit Starbucks Refreshers. The complaint claims that the products are predominantly made with water, grape juice concentrate, and sugar. Kominis and other consumers argue that they purchased the products and paid a premium price based on their belief that they contained the advertised fruits. They allege that if they had known the products were missing the fruits, they would not have purchased them or would have paid significantly less. The lawsuit accuses Starbucks of deceptive business practices and seeks to represent a class of all residents of New York who purchased any of the products for personal consumption. The claims include violation of the deceptive acts and practices statute, breach of express warranty, unjust enrichment, and breach of implied warranty. The plaintiffs seek monetary damages, restitution, disgorgement of profits, interest, and attorneys' fees and costs. They also request class certification, a declaration of the defendant's conduct as unlawful, and a jury trial.

Full Screen

X Social Media, LLC v. X Corp.

Improved Summary: X Corp, previously known as Twitter and currently under the ownership of Elon Musk, faces a lawsuit from X Social Media, a legal-marketing firm. The Florida-based agency, renowned for its expertise in mass-tort litigation, argues that X Corp's rebranding, which includes the use of "X", could lead to consumer confusion. X Social Media, which has held the trademark for its name since 2016, asserts that this rebranding has negatively impacted its revenue. The firm is not only seeking a court injunction to prohibit X Corp from using the "X" in its name but also demands unspecified financial compensation for the alleged damages.