The Kerrygold butter lawsuit over PFAS in the brand’s foil packaging ended on August 14, 2024, when both sides jointly dismissed the case with prejudice. No settlement was reached, no class was certified, and consumers who bought the butter received no payout or claims process. An earlier 2018 lawsuit challenging Kerrygold’s “grass-fed” marketing had already been dismissed in 2019.
What the PFAS Lawsuit Alleged
Carolyn Winans filed the proposed class action against Ornua Foods North America on February 14, 2023, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York.1ClassAction.org. Kerrygold Pure Irish Butter Contains Forever Chemicals, Class Action Alleges Her complaint focused on PFAS, the synthetic “forever chemicals” that persist in the environment and build up in the body.
Winans alleged that the foil wrappers around Kerrygold’s salted and unsalted butter sticks contained PFAS and that the chemicals migrated from the packaging into the butter itself. Because Ornua marketed the product as “Pure Irish Butter,” she argued, consumers were led to believe they were buying butter free of artificial chemicals or contaminants. The suit claimed the PFAS were present either by design or through poor manufacturing controls, and that a health-conscious buyer would not have purchased the butter had they known.1ClassAction.org. Kerrygold Pure Irish Butter Contains Forever Chemicals, Class Action Alleges
The Recall That Preceded the Lawsuit
New York’s ban on PFAS in food packaging took effect December 31, 2022, and California’s followed on January 1, 2023.2PPAI. Catch Up on Current State Laws Regulating PFAS Chemicals Ornua pulled Kerrygold salted and unsalted butter sticks from shelves in both states because the existing wrappers did not comply.1ClassAction.org. Kerrygold Pure Irish Butter Contains Forever Chemicals, Class Action Alleges
That recall became central to the litigation. Because Ornua had already acted on the packaging issue itself, Winans argued she did not need independent lab results from the butter to make her allegations plausible at the pleading stage.
What the Court Ruled
Ornua moved to dismiss, arguing that “pure” in “Pure Irish Butter” referred to the butter’s Irish origin, not to the absence of contaminants. On April 23, 2024, Senior U.S. District Judge Frederic Block rejected that reading. He found it plausible that a reasonable consumer could interpret “pure” to mean free of contaminants like PFAS, and called Ornua’s proposed reading “the more unnatural of the two.”3CCH. Winans v. Ornua Foods North America, Memorandum and Order
Judge Block also accepted the plaintiff’s migration theory, which posited that PFAS traveled from the wrapper into the butter. Winans cited five scientific studies supporting chemical migration from food packaging. The court held that requiring lab testing of the butter itself at the pleading stage would be too high a bar, especially given that Ornua had already recalled the product over PFAS in the packaging.4vLex. Winans v. Ornua Foods N. Am., Inc.
Five claims survived the motion:
- Deceptive business acts under New York General Business Law § 349
- False advertising under GBL § 350
- Selling adulterated or misbranded food under New York Agriculture and Markets Law § 199-a
- Negligence per se
- Unjust enrichment
The court dismissed Winans’s request for injunctive relief, finding she had not shown a sufficient likelihood of future injury to establish standing on that claim.3CCH. Winans v. Ornua Foods North America, Memorandum and Order
How the Case Ended
The surviving claims never went further. On August 14, 2024, the parties filed a joint stipulation of dismissal, and Judge Block issued an electronic order ending the case with prejudice, which means it cannot be refiled.5ClassAction.org. Winans v. Ornua Foods North America, Stipulation of Dismissal The stipulation stated the dismissal was “without costs to any party as against the other” and that each side would bear its own attorney fees.6Top Class Actions. Kerrygold Class Action Claims Product Falsely Advertised as Pure Irish Butter
Court documents made no mention of a settlement.1ClassAction.org. Kerrygold Pure Irish Butter Contains Forever Chemicals, Class Action Alleges No class was ever certified, and no claims process or payout was set up for buyers of the butter.6Top Class Actions. Kerrygold Class Action Claims Product Falsely Advertised as Pure Irish Butter If you bought Kerrygold during the period in question, there is nothing to file for.
What Changed on the Packaging
Ornua updated its butter packaging in response to the state bans, and the company has said the current wrappers are made without PFAS and comply with the New York and California laws. Kerrygold has stopped short of using the label “PFAS-free,” reportedly because independent testing can still detect trace fluorine compounds from cross-contamination during manufacturing.7FoodPrint. Eco-Ethical Brand Called Out The products returned to shelves after the packaging changes.
The Earlier Grass-Fed Lawsuit
The PFAS case was not the first suit over Kerrygold’s marketing. In July 2018, Dyami Myers-Taylor filed a class action against Ornua Foods North America and Ornua Co-operative Limited in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, challenging labels including “Milk from Grass-fed Cows,” “All Natural,” and “100% Pure and Natural.” The complaint alleged that the cows were actually fed soy, corn, and other grains, some genetically modified.8National Agricultural Law Center. Lawsuit Alleges Misrepresentation of Feed Used for Cows An amended complaint filed that November pointed to Kerrygold’s own website, which acknowledged that roughly 10 to 15 percent of the cows’ diet came from grain and supplemental feed.9Truth in Advertising. Myers-Taylor v. Ornua Foods, First Amended Complaint
In February 2019, Judge Marilyn L. Huff dismissed the case for failure to state a claim. She ruled that a reasonable consumer would not read “grass-fed” to mean the cows ate nothing but grass, noted the packaging never claimed “100% grass-fed,” and described the pastoral imagery as non-actionable puffery. The court also found the plaintiff had not plausibly defined “natural” or shown that consumers could reasonably rely on the labels to infer an exclusively grass diet.10Justia. Myers-Taylor v. Ornua Foods North America, Inc. The plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the case without prejudice the following month, and it was never refiled.11Truth in Advertising. Kerrygold Butter Products That case, like the PFAS case, produced no settlement and no consumer payout.