Starbucks Faces $5 Million Lawsuit Over Alleged Discriminatory Charges for Non-Dairy Milk
Source: The DairyNews
Starbucks, the renowned coffee chain, finds itself embroiled in a $5 million lawsuit filed by three customers who claim that the extra charges for non-dairy milk options discriminate against individuals with lactose intolerance.
Filed in the District Court in Eastern California, the lawsuit seeks class-action status and alleges that Starbucks' practice of charging additional fees for non-dairy alternatives unfairly targets customers with lactose intolerance and milk allergies. The plaintiffs, who have faced these charges while ordering various coffee-based and tea-based beverages at Starbucks retail coffee shops in California since 2018, assert that these surcharges, ranging from 50 cents to 80 cents, are aimed at profiting from individuals with dietary restrictions.
The lawsuit contends that Starbucks' actions violate the Americans with Disabilities Act, California Unruh Civil Rights Act, and constitute unjust enrichment under common law. This legal action echoes similar complaints against Dunkin', with both cases being represented by the Keith Gibson Law firm.
Bogdan Enica, an attorney representing the Dunkin' plaintiffs, highlights lactose intolerance as a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act, emphasizing the importance of accommodating individuals with such conditions.
Starbucks' practices regarding non-dairy milk have faced scrutiny in the past. In 2020, the company drew criticism for imposing additional charges for non-dairy milk alternatives, prompting protests from animal rights groups and vegans across the US. Enica's firm previously filed a class-action lawsuit against Starbucks in 2022 on similar grounds.
As Starbucks navigates this legal challenge, it underscores the ongoing debate surrounding accessibility and inclusivity in food and beverage service industries.
The lawsuit contends that Starbucks' actions violate the Americans with Disabilities Act, California Unruh Civil Rights Act, and constitute unjust enrichment under common law. This legal action echoes similar complaints against Dunkin', with both cases being represented by the Keith Gibson Law firm.
Bogdan Enica, an attorney representing the Dunkin' plaintiffs, highlights lactose intolerance as a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act, emphasizing the importance of accommodating individuals with such conditions.
Starbucks' practices regarding non-dairy milk have faced scrutiny in the past. In 2020, the company drew criticism for imposing additional charges for non-dairy milk alternatives, prompting protests from animal rights groups and vegans across the US. Enica's firm previously filed a class-action lawsuit against Starbucks in 2022 on similar grounds.
As Starbucks navigates this legal challenge, it underscores the ongoing debate surrounding accessibility and inclusivity in food and beverage service industries.
