Lawyer behind hundreds of US food labeling cases hit with fraud ruling
By David Thomas
July 5 (Reuters) -An attorney known for filing hundreds of food and beverage labeling lawsuits was sanctioned this week by a federal judge in Florida who said the lawyer "engaged in a concerted effort to defraud this court and likely many, many others."
Spencer Sheehan must pay a still-to-be-determined amount to cover attorney fees and costs incurred by retailer Big Lots, whom Sheehan and his client accused of selling coffee with a misleading label, U.S. District Judge Gregory Presnell ruled Wednesday.
Other judges have previously threatened Sheehan with sanctions after finding his lawsuits were frivolous, not viable or filed in bad faith, including in cases against Walmart and Starbucks.
Great Neck, New York-based Sheehan did not immediately respond to a request for comment. He has previously defended his lawsuits as reasonable, and said in a court filing last year that had never been formally sanctioned.
He disclosed in a separate court filing last year that he filed more than 500 lawsuits between January 2020 and April 2023.
Sheehan and his co-counsel, William Wright of West Palm Beach, Florida, sued Big Lots in September, alleging the retailer's dark coffee tins did not contain 210 servings of coffee as suggested on the label, only 152 servings.
Big Lots denied the claims, calling them frivolous as Sheehan had filed an almost-identical lawsuit against the retailer in New York federal court in 2021 that was thrown out.
Presnell dismissed the Florida case in March. He said Wednesday that Sheehan "flagrantly disregarded" the court's rules by actively participating in the case without seeking permission as an out-of-state lawyer.
The judge said Sheehan had been ordered in 24 other cases in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida to seek permission to appear, but had obeyed in only two of them.
"Sheehan has undeniably acted in bad faith throughout this case -- in addition to perpetrating a fraud on this court," Presnell said.
Presnell also ordered Wright to show cause on why he shouldn't be sanctioned as well for being "knowingly and willingly complicit in this abuse." Wright did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Spokespersons and attorneys for Big Lots did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
The case is Peggy Durant v. Big Lots, Inc., U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, 5:23-cv-00561
For Peggy Durant: William Wright, of The Wright Law Office, and Spencer Sheehan, of Sheehan & Associates PC
Big Lots: Jacob Harper, Heather Canner, Joseph Elie-Meyers, Laura Handman and Matthew Tuchman of Davis Wright Tremaine; Ana Saruski of Mintzer ,Sarowitz, Zeris, Ledva & Meyers, LLP
Related Assets
Latest News
Disclaimer: The XM Group entities provide execution-only service and access to our Online Trading Facility, permitting a person to view and/or use the content available on or via the website, is not intended to change or expand on this, nor does it change or expand on this. Such access and use are always subject to: (i) Terms and Conditions; (ii) Risk Warnings; and (iii) Full Disclaimer. Such content is therefore provided as no more than general information. Particularly, please be aware that the contents of our Online Trading Facility are neither a solicitation, nor an offer to enter any transactions on the financial markets. Trading on any financial market involves a significant level of risk to your capital.
All material published on our Online Trading Facility is intended for educational/informational purposes only, and does not contain – nor should it be considered as containing – financial, investment tax or trading advice and recommendations; or a record of our trading prices; or an offer of, or solicitation for, a transaction in any financial instruments; or unsolicited financial promotions to you.
Any third-party content, as well as content prepared by XM, such as: opinions, news, research, analyses, prices and other information or links to third-party sites contained on this website are provided on an “as-is” basis, as general market commentary, and do not constitute investment advice. To the extent that any content is construed as investment research, you must note and accept that the content was not intended to and has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research and as such, it would be considered as marketing communication under the relevant laws and regulations. Please ensure that you have read and understood our Notification on Non-Independent Investment. Research and Risk Warning concerning the foregoing information, which can be accessed here.
