Foodie Pundit

Berry Deceptive: Why The Wiley Wallaby Lawsuit Is A Massive Wake-Up Call For Food Labels

The Ninth Circuit just revived a class action lawsuit against the makers of Wiley Wallaby licorice, proving that "natural" claims are no longer a safe bet for food brands.

By Foodie Pundit Newsroom - Published - Updated - Section: Policy Regulation

apple photograph for this story

Key points

  • The Ninth Circuit has reinstated a class action lawsuit against KLN Family Brands, alleging their Wiley Wallaby berry licorice uses synthetic ingredients despite 'natural' labeling.
  • The case hinges on the use of artificial malic acid, a common industry shortcut that mimics natural tartness but can trigger deceptive marketing claims.
  • This ruling signals a shift in legal standards, where 'reasonable consumers' are not expected to be chemists to understand a food label's accuracy.

A high-stakes legal battle over what exactly constitutes a "natural" flavor has just been revived in the Ninth Circuit, and it is sending shockwaves through the snack aisle. On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit breathed new life into a proposed class action lawsuit against KLN Family Brands, the makers of the popular Wiley Wallaby-brand berry licorice. The suit, which was previously dismissed, has been officially reinstated, signaling that the courts are becoming increasingly skeptical of "all-natural" branding in an era of hyper-processed ingredients.

The core of the dispute is relatively straightforward but carries massive implications for the food industry: Is it deceptive to label a product as being made with "natural flavors" if it contains a chemically synthesized ingredient that performs the same function? The Ninth Circuit appellate judges seem to think the argument is at least strong enough to go before a jury. They found that the unnamed consumer behind the suit leveled "plausible allegations" that KLN Family Brands' marketing and labeling would likely trick a reasonable consumer.

In the world of CPG (Consumer Packaged Goods), the Ninth Circuit is a heavyweight. Their decisions often set the tone for how food labels are regulated across the country, especially in California, which is a massive market for "clean label" products. By reviving this suit, the court is effectively saying that "close enough" is no longer good enough when it comes to ingredient transparency. Who's On The Hook

The defendant in this case is KLN Family Brands, a major player in the snack and pet food categories. While you might not know the parent company name, you definitely know Wiley Wallaby. It is the soft, chunky, gourmet-style licorice that has carved out a massive niche in grocery stores like Target, Whole Foods, and your favorite local specialty shops. Unlike the thin, plastic-like ropes of traditional movie theater licorice, Wiley Wallaby positions itself as a premium, elevated snack experience.

The plaintiff is an unnamed consumer, which is standard for the early stages of a proposed class action. This individual represents a growing class of "conscious consumers" who are willing to pay a premium for products they believe are free from synthetic additives. The lawsuit isn't just about one person being upset over a bag of candy, it is about more than that. It represents a potential class of thousands of buyers who purchased the berry-flavored licorice under the impression that its "natural" claims were bulletproof.

If this case proceeds and KLN Family Brands loses, the financial exposure could be significant. We aren't just talking about a fine from a regulatory body. We are talking about potential refunds for every bag of berry licorice sold during the class period, plus legal fees, and the astronomical cost of a total brand overhaul and packaging redesign. Wiley Wallaby lied about berries

The allegations dive deep into the chemistry of the candy bag. The plaintiff alleges that while Wiley Wallaby berry licorice is marketed with labels emphasizing natural flavors, the recipe actually includes an artificial ingredient that mimics or enhances those flavors.

The specific "villain" in these types of lawsuits is often malic acid or a similar flavoring agent. While malic acid can occur naturally (think of the tartness in a Granny Smith apple), the version used in mass-produced candy is often d-l malic acid, a synthetic petrochemical derivative. Under FDA guidelines, if a synthetic ingredient is used to create or reinforce the characteristic flavor of a product, the label must state "artificial flavors."

The lawsuit claims that KLN Family Brands used this synthetic shortcut while keeping the "natural" branding front and center. To a Gen Z or Millennial shopper, seeing "Natural Berry Flavor" on a bag suggests a level of purity. If that flavor is actually being propped up by a lab-grown chemical, the plaintiff argues that the "natural" claim moves from marketing fluff to outright deception. The Ninth Circuit agreed that a "reasonable consumer" wouldn't necessarily know the chemical difference and would rely on the front-of-pack claims when making a purchase decision. Financial Fallout

While the exact dollar amount of the lawsuit hasn't been publicized yet, the potential financial fallout for KLN Family Brands is massive. Let's look at the math of a typical CPG class action. If millions of bags were sold over several years at roughly five dollars to seven dollars a pop, the "price premium" (the extra money consumers paid because they thought the product was superior) adds up fast.

Beyond the courtroom, there is the "Brand Tax." Wiley Wallaby has built its reputation on being the "better-for-you" licorice. When a brand that markets itself on quality and transparency gets hit with a deceptive labeling suit, the trust erodes instantly.

For independent retailers who stock these products specifically to cater to health-conscious customers, this news is a nightmare. It forces them to reconsider their shelf space.

Furthermore, the cost of litigation in the Ninth Circuit is notoriously high. Corporations often spend millions just to reach the discovery phase. If KLN Family Brands settles, they satisfy the court but admit a certain level of vulnerability. If they fight and lose, they set a legal precedent that could make them a target for future suits involving their other flavors and product lines. Big Tobacco Parallels

It might sound dramatic to compare licorice to cigarettes, but the legal strategy here is straight out of the Big Tobacco playbook. Decades ago, tobacco companies were sued not just for the product itself, but for how they marketed "light" or "natural" cigarettes to imply they were safer.

Sources and methodology

Reported from the public datasets below.

All sources Foodie Pundit reports from

More from the Foodie Pundit Newsroom

Permalink