Lindt Chocolate Lawsuit: Lead Claims, Ruling, and Outcome

The Lindt chocolate lawsuit was a consolidated class action in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York accusing Lindt & Sprüngli of selling dark chocolate bars with unsafe levels of lead and cadmium while marketing them as “expertly crafted with the finest ingredients.” Filed in February 2023 as In Re: Lindt & Sprüngli Dark Chocolate Litigation, the case survived Lindt’s motion to dismiss in September 2024 and was then terminated on December 17, 2024, after the parties filed a stipulation of dismissal on undisclosed terms.¹

What the Lawsuit Alleged

The complaint targeted two products: the Lindt Excellence 70% Cocoa bar and the Lindt Excellence 85% Cocoa bar. Lead plaintiff Luke Gralia, a Brooklyn resident, said he had bought the 85% bar “numerous times” at a Rite Aid in Queens.² After consolidation, the case named plaintiffs from Alabama, California, Florida, Illinois, Nevada, and New York, with a class period running from February 15, 2018.³

Plaintiffs argued that Lindt’s marketing led reasonable consumers to believe the chocolate was free from harmful contaminants. They pointed to phrases like “expertly crafted with the finest ingredients,” “safe, as well as delightful,” and Lindt’s claims about rigorous quality and safety oversight.⁴ Their theory of injury was a price premium: consumers paid more for Lindt because of that perceived quality, and would have paid less, or not bought the chocolate at all, had Lindt disclosed the metals.²

The complaint also alleged that Lindt had been on notice about heavy metals in its dark chocolate since at least 2014, when a nonprofit informed the company of test results.²

Where the Contamination Claims Came From

The lawsuit grew out of a December 2022 Consumer Reports investigation. The publication tested 28 dark chocolate bars from various brands and found lead and cadmium in every one. Because the United States has no federal limits for these metals in most foods, Consumer Reports measured its results against California’s Proposition 65 Maximum Allowable Dose Levels: 0.5 micrograms per day for lead and 4.1 micrograms per day for cadmium.⁵

The two Lindt bars showed opposite problems. The 70% Cocoa bar hit 48% of the lead threshold but 116% of the cadmium threshold. The 85% Cocoa bar came in at 166% of the lead threshold and 80% of the cadmium threshold. Across the full sample, 23 of the 28 bars would have exceeded California’s limit for at least one metal at one ounce per day, and five exceeded the limits for both.⁵

How the Court Ruled on the Motion to Dismiss

Lindt moved to dismiss in November 2023. The company argued that lead and cadmium are unavoidable in the food supply, that trace amounts in its products fall below applicable regulatory thresholds, and that information about heavy metals in chocolate was already public, so Lindt owed no special duty to disclose it. The company also characterized its marketing language as “puffery,” the legal term for exaggerated advertising no reasonable buyer would treat as a factual promise.⁶

U.S. District Judge Ann M. Donnelly denied the motion in full in September 2024. She ruled that a phrase like “finest ingredients” was not mere bluster and that a reasonable consumer could read it as a specific representation about ingredient quality and safety, including the absence of toxic contaminants at unsafe levels.⁷ She also held that whether the actual lead and cadmium levels were “unsafe” was a factual dispute that could not be resolved at the pleading stage, and she accepted the plaintiffs’ price-premium theory as sufficient to establish standing.⁶

Lindt’s Public Response

Lindt has consistently said its products are safe. A company spokesperson told Snopes that Lindt’s “quality and safety procedures ensure that our entire line of products complies with all applicable safety standards and declaration requirements and are safe to consume.” On California’s Proposition 65 thresholds specifically, the company said, “Lindt chocolate does not exceed such threshold.”⁸

After the puffery ruling drew press attention, Lindt clarified that the argument was a “technical” legal position meant to show that the challenged advertising was “not sufficiently objective to support the specific false advertising claim being made,” not a concession that its chocolate was inferior.⁹

How the Case Ended

After the motion to dismiss was denied, Lindt answered the amended complaint in October 2024 and the parties began discovery. On December 16, 2024, Lindt filed a stipulation of dismissal, and the case was terminated the following day.¹ No class was ever certified, and no trial date was set. The public docket does not indicate whether the dismissal reflects a confidential settlement or a voluntary end on other terms, and no consumer claims process was announced. A separate Lindt case filed in the Northern District of California by plaintiff Kamila Harkavy was also dismissed.¹⁰

Why There Is No Federal Limit for Metals in Chocolate

The case leaned heavily on a regulatory gap. The FDA does not set specific lead or cadmium levels for chocolate sold to adults.¹¹ Its “Closer to Zero” initiative has focused on baby and toddler foods, and no draft or final action levels have been proposed for chocolate.¹² The Codex Alimentarius Commission has recommended maximum cadmium levels for dark chocolate of 0.7 to 0.9 milligrams per kilogram, but those recommendations are not binding in the United States. That absence is why the Consumer Reports test and the lawsuits that followed all used California’s Proposition 65 numbers as a benchmark, and why Lindt could accurately say its products complied with “all applicable safety standards.”

The health concerns behind the litigation are well established. No safe blood lead level has been identified, and cadmium accumulates in the body and is associated with kidney damage, osteoporosis, and cancer, with the greatest risks for pregnant people and young children.⁵

Similar Cases Against Other Chocolate Makers

Lindt was one of several manufacturers sued after the Consumer Reports investigation. Class actions followed against Hershey, Trader Joe’s, Mars (over its Dove brand), and Godiva.¹³ The Hershey case ended in March 2025 when the plaintiff agreed to permanently dismiss her suit while preserving the ability of other potential class members to file their own.¹⁴ Trader Joe’s won summary judgment after a court found the company did not have exclusive knowledge about heavy metals in chocolate, noting that the information had been publicly available in reports dating back to 2002.¹⁵

There is also earlier history. In 2018, a California Superior Court approved a consent judgment between the nonprofit As You Sow and nine major chocolate companies, including Lindt, Hershey, Mars, Mondelez, and Nestlé. The settlement set Proposition 65 warning thresholds tied to a product’s cacao percentage and required an industry-funded study of contamination sources and reduction measures.¹⁶ The three-year study, completed around 2022, confirmed that bean cleaning during processing reduces metal levels in finished chocolate.⁵ For plaintiffs’ lawyers, the fact that Consumer Reports still found concerning levels after that settlement was a central point: industry self-regulation had not resolved the issue.

1
CourtListener. In Re: Lindt & Sprüngli Dark Chocolate Litigation – Docket
2
Truthinadvertising.org. Gralia v. Lindt Complaint
3
Justia. In Re: Lindt & Sprüngli Dark Chocolate Litigation
4
Fortune. Lindt US Lawsuit
5
Consumer Reports. Lead and Cadmium Could Be in Your Dark Chocolate
6
GovInfo. Gralia v. Lindt & Sprüngli, Memorandum Decision and Order
7
WATE. Lindt Admits Chocolate May Not Be Expertly Crafted in Class Action Lawsuit Battle
8
Snopes. Lindt Chocolate Heavy Metals
9
France 24. Lindt Disputes US Lawsuit Claims, Stands by Excellence Labelling
10
Top Class Actions. Lindt Dark Chocolate Class Action Claims Some Products Contain Lead, Cadmium
11
FDA. Cadmium in Food and Foodwares
12
FDA. Closer to Zero: Reducing Childhood Exposure to Contaminants From Foods
13
Top Class Actions. Consumers File Class Actions After Report Reveals Heavy Metals in Dark Chocolate
14
Law360. Hershey Customer Agrees to End Metals in Chocolate Suit
15
Daily Intake Blog. Summary Judgment Granted in Heavy Metals in Chocolate Class Action
16
As You Sow. Court Establishes Guidelines for Chocolate Sold in California