Hain Celestial Must Face Arsenic in Baby Food Claims (1)

Hain Celestial Group Inc. will have to face allegations it mislabeled baby food products that contained unsafe levels of arsenic from a class of parents, a district court ruled Friday.

The class of parents and caregivers plausibly alleged that Hain failed to inform them of material information concerning the level of arsenic in some of its products, Judge Nina R. Morrison said in an order in the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York. Morrison declined to dismiss the class’ claims alleging Hain’s products are materially misleading concerning arsenic.

The arsenic levels would “have been material to reasonable consumers who purchased Hain’s baby food for their children and were willing to pay a premium for healthy and safe products,” Morrison said.

The consolidated class action accuses Hain of marketing its Earth’s Best Organic line of products despite being tainted with heavy metals like lead. Suits began to flow in from parents after a congressional report found multiple brands of baby food were contaminated with elevated levels of arsenic, lead, cadmium, and mercury.

Hain asked Morrison to dismiss each of the class’ claims, arguing they failed to state a claim and lack standing to sue, according to the order. But Morrison ruled that the parents sufficiently alleged that Hain’s baby food products contained excess levels of arsenic when compared to the US Food and Drug Administration guidelines.

“Hain Celestial stands behind its products and will have the opportunity to prove in the course of the litigation that its products do not contain ‘unsafe’ levels of arsenic and that they are properly labeled,” a representative with Hain said in a statement Monday.

But the same can’t be said for the class’ other claims related to heavy metals like lead, cadmium, mercury, perchlorate, and “other undesirable toxins or contaminants,” Morrison said. She dismissed these claims for failing to state a claim since the parents only “broadly alleged” Hain’s products were likely “dangerous” or “toxic” because of the trace amounts of these metals that they contain.

“Without any specific allegations as to why a reasonable consumer would find the particular composition of the products that contain these heavy metals to be ‘dangerous’ for this reason, and thus at odds with Hain’s labeling, they have failed to state a claim,” Morrison said.

The class failed to allege any specific guidelines or limits in the dismissed claims for what constitutes a dangerous level of the heavy metals associated with baby food products, according to the order. They also failed to explain how or why a customer would consider the recommended amount of lead allowed in water to be material in whether to purchase a baby food product.

Morrison declined to dismiss the class’ common law claims regarding negligent misrepresentation, breach of express and implied warranty, and unjust enrichment since some of Hain’s labeling has been found to be misleading, according to the order.

The FDA has faced criticism from national lawmakers after it quietly removed deadlines for setting guidelines on heavy metals in baby food from its website in 2023.

Labaton Keller Sucharow LLP represents the class. Jenner & Block LLP represents Hain.

The case is In re Hain Celestial Heavy Metals Baby Food Litigation, E.D.N.Y., No. 2:21-cv-00678, order 12/27/24.