You might remember the viral lawsuit by an elderly woman against McDonald's when the company's coffee was too hot to handle. (If you don't, you can listen more about it and come back). That case was nearly 30 years ago, but it would seem times haven't changed that much; another major restaurant chain is facing litigation over its own caffeinated drinks.
The slightly healthier fast-food alternative Panera Bread has been hit with not one but two separate wrongful death lawsuits over their highly caffeinated "Charged Lemonade" beverage, alleging that it caused the deaths of two individuals. Let's break down the charges.
Unwitting Plaintiffs Suffer Heart Trouble
The plaintiffs in each of the two lawsuits are the families of two Panera consumers who both died in the fall of 2022. One of the deceased is Sarah Katz, who was a 21-year-old University of Pennsylvania student. The other is one Dennis Brown, from Florida.
Their families claim that the Charged Lemonade contained “excessive caffeine," more even than popular energy drinks Red Bull and Monster combined. The complaints also alleged that Panera failed to adequately warn consumers about the caffeine content and that this lack of warning caused the individuals to consume excessive caffeine, leading to their deaths.
Sarah Katz had a preexisting heart condition known as “Long QT Type 1 Syndrome." This is a rare disorder where the heart's electrical system takes longer than normal to recharge between beats, potentially leading to dangerous heart rhythms and sudden death. Katz was diagnosed with the syndrome early in life and medicated for it daily. As a part of her care, she avoided highly caffeinated beverages including energy drinks, as they have been shown to adversely affect the heart's rhythm in Long QT individuals.
Last September, Katz drank Panera's lemonade presumably thinking it had a “safe" amount of caffeine. She died later the same day. The report from the medical examiner lists the cause of her death as “cardiac arrhythmia caused by long QT syndrome." The Katz family's attorney stated that the college student was very careful about her condition and health, saying, “If she didn't know that this was an energy drink, it makes the family concerned about who else doesn't know."
Dennis Brown also appears to have some preexisting conditions that might affect how his body handled Panera's new drink. His lawsuit stated that he had “high blood pressure, a developmental delay, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, and a chromosomal disorder that caused a mild intellectual disability and blurry vision."
A month after Sarah Katz's incident, he also ordered the caffeinated lemonade — and had two refills. During his walk home, he suffered a “cardiac event" and was soon dead. His death certificate stated that he died from “cardiac arrest due to hypertensive disease."
Charged Lemonade gets Charged Legally
The Lemonade was advertised as “plant-based and clean." It was offered alongside the restaurant's non-caffeinated and much less caffeinated drinks. According to photos of the restaurant menu and drink dispensers included in the complaint, Panera represented that the Charged Lemonade contained as much caffeine as the restaurant's dark roast coffee. In reality,
Just how much caffeine was in this thing? Depending on the size, about 3-5 times as much as a cup of coffee. The regular 20 oz. serving has 260 milligrams of caffeine, while the large 30 oz. has 390 milligrams. The FDA advises that most healthy adults can have up to 400 milligrams a day. But again, the plaintiffs here are not exactly “most healthy adults." Indeed, a few months after the lemonade's release, a lot of media attention inquired into the safety of the drink, with dieticians voicing their skepticism.
Katz's lawsuit compared the lemonade's marketing with Gatorade to argue that the way that Panera's drink was branded and displayed made it misleading to consumers. For example, the complaint pointed out:
The Gatorade logo depicts a heavy black capital letter “G," which stands for the name of the brand, with a sharp orange and red lightning bolt, which represents the energy and power the drink gives through electrolytes, such as potassium and sodium. 26. Gatorade contains no caffeine but uses a “charged" symbol to represent hydration. 27. Panera Charged Lemonade also advertised using the term “charged."
You might argue that Panera's response was a bit inconsistent. On the one hand they maintain that the product was properly labeled and that the deaths were due to pre-existing medical conditions. But at the same time, the company has since added a warning label to Charged Lemonade stating its caffeine content.
After-the-Fact Warning Label Not Evidence
The warning label appears at the top of the order when customers try to order a Charged Lemonade beverage on the Panera website. The warning message states: “Charged Sips contain 245-390mg of CAFFEINE - Consume in Moderation. NOT RECOMMENDED FOR children, people sensitive to caffeine, pregnant or nursing women". Panera also moved the charged drink fountain behind the counter and put up warning signs.
But if you're thinking to yourself, “Well, that just shows that Panera knew what they did was wrong," it's a bit more complicated than that when it comes to trial. An important thing to keep in mind is how this action on Panera's part can or can't come into evidence before a jury. As any good trial attorney will tell you, there's something called the “subsequent remedial measures rule" that would likely block it.
The rule basically says that you can't use the fact someone fixed something after a problem to prove they were at fault for the problem. For example, if you sue someone for a slip and fall injury, you can't use the fact they added a "wet floor" sign after your fall to prove they knew the floor was wet and should have warned people. Similarly, the plaintiffs are generally barred from pointing to the fact that Panera responded by changing the labeling of the Lemonade to argue that they were negligent in failing to do so in the first place, or otherwise guilty of wrong.
What to Expect
At this stage, it's still too early to even know if any of this will matter. For all we know, Panera could choose to settle the case, unlike McDonald's in the coffee suit. The plaintiff in the McDonald's case was open to settlement, but the hamburger giant refused. And when they did, they lost a whole lot more money than they could have if they'd just taken the settlement. Perhaps Panera will learn from McDonald's mistake thirty years ago, but for now, they should continue to warn their customers that their product isn't exactly the nostalgic beverage of our childhood summers.
Related Resources:
- What Is a Wrongful Death Lawsuit? (FindLaw's Learn About the Law)
- Burger King Forced to Litigate Whopper of a Lawsuit (FindLaw's Legally Weird)
- Fair Advertising FAQ: A Guide for Small Business (FindLaw's Small Business Law Resources)
