This case was last updated from U.S. District Courts on 12/15/2021 at 07:44:27 (UTC).

Quinn v. Trader Joe's Company

Case Summary

On October 16, 2021, Heather Quinn (“Plaintiff”), individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, represented by Spencer Sheehan of Sheehan & Associates, P.C., filed a class action lawsuit against Trader Joe's Company (“defendant”), seeking preliminary and permanent injunctive relief and monetary damages along with costs and expenses among other relief for the alleged misrepresentation of the product. This case was filed in the United States District Court in the Northern District of Illinois with Judge Jorge L. Alonso presiding.

In the complaint, Plaintiff alleged that, “Trader Joe's Company (“defendant”) manufactures, labels, markets, and sells organic frosted toaster pastries purporting to be filled only with strawberries” and “The Product’s common or usual name of “Organic Frosted Toaster Pastries – Strawberry,” is false, misleading, and deceptive because the predominant fruit filling ingredient is apples, shown on the ingredient list as “Apple Puree Concentrate” and “Because the relative amounts of the ingredients are determined based on their order of predominance by weight, it is evident that the amount of apple ingredients (“Apple Puree Concentrate” – sixth ingredient) exceeds the amount of strawberry ingredients.”

Plaintiff further alleged that, “The Product’s name, “Organic Frosted Toaster Pastries – Strawberry,” is misleading because it includes “Strawberry,” but does not include apples, even though the fine print of the ingredient list reveals the fruit filling is mostly apples. 21 C.F.R. § 101.18(b)” and “Toaster pastries which contain strawberries as their predominant filling ingredient are not a rare or pricy delicacy that would make a reasonable consumer “double check” the relative amount of the strawberries by scouring the packaging.” 

Plaintiff also alleged that, “To give consumers the false impression that the Product contains more strawberries than it does, it includes “vegetable juice for color” and “This causes the mainly apple filling to look red, like it would if it contained more strawberries, even though it contains a de minimis or negligible amount of strawberries.” Plaintiff also alleged that, “Reasonable consumers must and do rely on a company to honestly identify and describe the components, attributes, and features of a product, relative to itself and other comparable products or alternatives” and “By labeling the Product in this manner, Defendant gained an advantage against other companies, and against consumers seeking to purchase a product with more of the named ingredient than it contained.”

There are five claims of relief laid down by Plaintiff. The first claim is for the alleged violation of Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (“ICFA”), 815 ILCS 505/1, et seq. The second claim is for the alleged breaches of express warranty, implied warranty of merchantability and Magnuson Moss Warranty Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 2301, et seq. The third claim is for the alleged negligent misrepresentation. The fourth claim is for the alleged fraud. The fifth claim is for alleged unjust enrichment.

In the prayer for relief, Plaintiff requested the court to certify this action as class action and appoint Plaintiff as the representative of the class. Further, Plaintiff requested the court for injunctive relief and monetary damages, statutory and/or punitive damages, restitution, and disgorgement for members of the class. Plaintiff requested costs and expenses including reasonable fees for Plaintiff's attorneys and experts, and any other relief the court deems just and proper.

This case summary may not reflect the current position of the parties to this litigation or the status of this case. Sign up to view the latest case updates and court documents.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets


Case Details

  • Case Number:


  • Filing Date:


  • Case Status:

    Pending - Other Pending

  • Case Type:

    Property - Personal Property Fraud

Judge Details

Presiding Judge

Jorge L. Alonso


Party Details


Heather Quinn


Trader Joe's Company

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff Attorney

Spencer Sheehan

Attorney at Sheehan & Associates, P.C.

60 Cuttermill Road, Suite 409

Great Neck, NY 11021


Court Documents





(#4) WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed by Heather Quinn. Trader Joe's Company waiver sent on 12/8/2021, answer due 2/7/2022. (Sheehan, Spencer) (Entered: 12/10/2021)


Docket Entries

  • 12/10/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#4) WAIVER OF SERVICE returned executed by Heather Quinn. Trader Joe's Company waiver sent on 12/8/2021, answer due 2/7/2022. (Sheehan, Spencer) (Entered: 12/10/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/19/2021
  • DocketSUMMONS Issued as to Defendant Trader Joe's Company (mxo, ) (Entered: 10/19/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/18/2021
  • DocketCASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Jorge L. Alonso. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable M. David Weisman. Case assignment: Random assignment. (ak, ) (Entered: 10/18/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/16/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#3) ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Heather Quinn by Spencer Sheehan (Sheehan, Spencer) (Entered: 10/16/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/16/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#2) CIVIL Cover Sheet (Sheehan, Spencer) (Entered: 10/16/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less
  • 10/16/2021
  • View Court Documents
  • Docket(#1) COMPLAINT filed by Heather Quinn; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 402, receipt number 0752-18775986.(Sheehan, Spencer) (Entered: 10/16/2021)

    [+] Read More [-] Read Less

Dig Deeper

Get Deeper Insights on Court Cases

Latest cases where TRADER JOE'S COMPANY is a litigant

Latest cases represented by Lawyer Spencer Sheehan