PepsiCo beats New York state's lawsuit over plastics pollution
Adds statement from attorney general's office, paragraph 8
PepsiCo was accused of polluting Buffalo's water supply
Judge criticizes Attorney General Letitia James for suing
James disappointed with decision, reviewing options
PepsiCo emphasizes commitment to plastics reduction
By Jonathan Stempel
NEW YORK, Nov 1 (Reuters) -PepsiCo PEP.O won the dismissal of New York's lawsuit accusing the beverage and snack-food company of polluting the environment with single-use plastic packaging, as the judge criticized the state's attorney general, Letitia James, for bringing the case.
Justice Emilio Colaiacovo of the state Supreme Court in Buffalo said on Thursday that James failed to show PepsiCo created a public nuisance and should have warned consumers about the health and environmental risks of plastics in more than 100 of its brands.
James sued PepsiCo and its Frito-Lay unit last November, seeking to hold them liable for endangering Buffalo's water supply by generating 17% of the plastic waste found in and near the Buffalo River. She also said the defendants deceived the public about their efforts to fight plastics pollution.
But the judge ruled it would run "contrary to every norm of established jurisprudence" to punish PepsiCo, because it was people, not the company, who ignored laws prohibiting littering.
He also said James, a Democrat, ignored a 2003 appeals court's refusal to hold Sturm Ruger RGR.N liable when criminals use its handguns and risk opening the floodgates to public nuisance lawsuits. James' predecessor, Eliot Spitzer, brought that case.
"While I can think of no reasonable person who does not believe in the imperatives of recycling and being better stewards of our environment, this does not give rise to phantom assertions of liability that do nothing to solve the problem that exists," wrote Colaiacovo, a Republican.
"The judicial system should not be burdened with predatory lawsuits that seek to impose punishment while searching for a crime," he added.
A spokeswoman for James said the attorney general's office is disappointed with the decision and reviewing its options, but was committed to protecting communities from plastic pollution, calling it "a major threat to our planet and our public health."
PepsiCo, based in Purchase, New York, said it is pleased with the decision, and "serious" about plastics reduction and effective recycling.
"Our time, attention and resources -- and those of other key stakeholders -- are best directed toward collaborative solutions," it added.
James' lawsuit is one of many by state and local governments and environmental groups against companies that use plastics.
Colaiacovo ruled one day after Los Angeles County filed a similar lawsuit against PepsiCo and Coca-Cola KO.N over their single-use plastic packaging.
PepsiCo's brands include Cheetos, Cracker Jack, Doritos, Fritos, Gatorade, Lay's, Lipton, Mountain Dew, Ocean Spray, Pepsi, Quaker, Ruffles and Tostitos.
The case is New York v. PepsiCo Inc et al, New York State Supreme Court, Erie County, No. 814682/2023.
Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Additional reporting by Nate Raymond in Boston; Editing by Franklin Paul and Matthew Lewis
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.
