The Poland Spring water lawsuit is a class action filed in 2017 alleging that Poland Spring’s “100% Natural Spring Water” label is deceptive because the product is ordinary groundwater, not spring water. The case is still active in federal court in Connecticut. It survived a major summary judgment challenge at the end of 2024, and as of spring 2026, plaintiffs are trying again to get a class certified after their first attempt was rejected on a technical defect.
What the Lawsuit Claims
The complaint’s central allegation is blunt: “not one drop” of Poland Spring water comes from a source that meets the federal definition of spring water.1San Diego Union-Tribune. Not One Drop of Poland Spring Bottled Water Is From a Spring, Lawsuit Says The plaintiffs say the water is common groundwater pumped from industrial wells in populated areas of southern Maine, some near landfills, waste sites, and farms. They also allege that the original Poland Spring in Poland, Maine, the brand’s namesake, ran dry nearly fifty years ago.2Joseph Saveri Law Firm. Is Poland Spring Water Really From a Spring
According to the complaint, six of the company’s eight Maine collection sites use artificial “springs” built from pipes, plastic tubes, and excavated pits to simulate a natural flow. Several wells are alleged to sit close enough to ponds and swamps that pumping pulls surface water into the wells.3Joseph Saveri Law Firm. Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint
The suit was filed on August 15, 2017, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut as Patane v. Nestlé Waters North America, Inc., Case No. 17-cv-1381.4Carrier Management. Poland Spring Bottled Water Is Mislabeled Common Groundwater, Suit Claims A companion case filed in Maine was later consolidated with it.5Truth in Advertising. Poland Spring Spring Water Plaintiffs from eight states are pressing claims under state consumer protection laws: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, and Rhode Island.6Claims Journal. Judge Refuses to Dismiss Lawsuit Claiming Poland Spring Not Spring Water
The plaintiffs are seeking refunds of the “unjustified premiums” consumers paid because of the spring water label, statutory penalties under state consumer laws, and a permanent injunction barring the company from using the “100% Natural Spring Water” label, the Poland Spring name, and mountain-and-forest imagery on packaging.7Joseph Saveri Law Firm. Nestle Bottled Water Litigation
The Legal Test at the Center of the Case
Everything turns on how the FDA defines spring water. Under 21 C.F.R. § 165.110, water can be labeled spring water only if it comes from an underground formation from which water flows naturally to the earth’s surface. If the water is collected through a borehole instead, the company must show a “measurable hydraulic connection” to the natural spring and prove the borehole water has the same physical and chemical properties as the water that emerges at the surface.8Cornell Law Institute. 21 CFR § 165.110 – Bottled Water
The plaintiffs argue Poland Spring’s Maine sites fail this test. According to the complaint, the wells lack natural orifices, aren’t hydraulically connected to genuine springs, and draw from saturated plains and valleys where the water table sits near the surface.3Joseph Saveri Law Firm. Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint
Poland Spring’s Defense
The company denies the allegations. Poland Spring says all of its sources meet the FDA’s definition of spring water and comply with federal and state guidelines.9Truth in Advertising. Poland Spring’s 100% Natural Spring Water Claims After the suit was filed, a senior environmental hydrologist for the state of Maine sent a letter confirming that all eight of the company’s water sources complied with the FDA definition.10Bangor Daily News. Poland Spring Says It Meets FDA’s Definition of Spring Water
The company has also argued that this is a regulatory question for the FDA, not the courts, and has noted that similar claims made in a 2003 Illinois case were settled without any change to the brand’s labeling.10Bangor Daily News. Poland Spring Says It Meets FDA’s Definition of Spring Water
Where the Case Stands Now
The case almost ended in May 2018, when the court dismissed the original complaint on federal preemption grounds. Plaintiffs refiled a consolidated amended complaint, and in March 2019 the court found that the eight states in question had adopted state law standards “substantively equivalent” to the FDA’s spring water definition, which allowed those claims to proceed. Claims brought under Vermont law were dismissed because Vermont had no equivalent state standard.11Joseph Saveri Law Firm. Order on Motion to Dismiss
After years of discovery, the case cleared its biggest hurdle on December 30, 2024. U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Alker Meyer largely denied the company’s motion for summary judgment, finding that whether Poland Spring qualifies as spring water under the laws of the eight remaining states is an “open question” that must go to trial.12Society of Environmental Journalists. Judge Won’t Dismiss Suit Claiming Poland Spring Water Isn’t Spring Judge Meyer cited testimony from a former Syracuse University earth sciences professor retained by the plaintiffs, who said the company used “man-made springs,” “pond water and other surface water” rather than true spring water.6Claims Journal. Judge Refuses to Dismiss Lawsuit Claiming Poland Spring Not Spring Water
The court did narrow the case. It dismissed all claims for injunctive relief that would have required new labels, reasoning that the plaintiffs now know about the allegations and can simply buy other brands. It also barred claims by eight plaintiffs bound by a release from the 2003 Illinois settlement covering water from four specific springs.13Scribd. Patane v. Nestlé Waters North America – Order on Summary Judgment
The fight then moved to class certification. On March 28, 2026, Judge Vernon D. Oliver denied the plaintiffs’ certification motion without prejudice, finding the proposed class definitions “unascertainable” because they lacked a specific end date for the class period. Plaintiffs filed a renewed motion on April 21, 2026, adding the defined end date the court had requested.14CourtListener. Patane v. Nestle Waters North America Inc. – Docket That motion is pending. No settlement talks, proposed settlement, or trial date have been publicly reported.15Maine Public. Judge Declines to Dismiss False Labeling, Deceptive Marketing Claims Against Poland Spring
Who Actually Owns Poland Spring Now
The defendant in the case caption is no longer the company that runs the brand. In March 2021, Nestlé sold its North American water business, including Poland Spring, to One Rock Capital Partners and Metropoulos & Co. for $4.3 billion.16Stamford Advocate. Nestle Waters North America, Owner of Poland Spring, Rebrands The business rebranded as BlueTriton Brands.17CSP Daily News. Nestle Waters North America Changes Name In November 2024, BlueTriton merged with Primo Water Corporation to form Primo Brands Corporation, which trades on the NYSE as PRMB.18Primo Brands. Primo Brands Corporation Announces Successful Completion of Merger The lawsuit continues under the original defendant name, and a Primo Brands spokesperson has said the company “looks forward to defending against the remaining claims.”15Maine Public. Judge Declines to Dismiss False Labeling, Deceptive Marketing Claims Against Poland Spring
The 2003 Illinois Settlement
Poland Spring has been sued over its labeling before. A 2003 class action in Illinois raised similar allegations, including that a primary collection site sat near a parking lot rather than deep in the Maine woods. A Kane County judge approved a settlement on November 6, 2003, totaling about $10.75 million: $8 million in consumer discounts and coupons distributed over five years, plus $2.75 million in charitable donations. The settlement did not require changes to the brand’s labeling, and Poland Spring kept marketing its product as natural spring water.19Los Angeles Times. Poland Spring Settles Lawsuit That old release is what knocked out eight plaintiffs from the current case in the December 2024 ruling.
Other Poland Spring Lawsuits
The “not really spring water” case is not the only suit Poland Spring’s parent company faces, and it’s easy to confuse them. In March 2024, a separate proposed class action, Moore v. BlueTriton Brands, Inc., was filed in the Eastern District of New York alleging Poland Spring bottles contain “dangerous levels” of microplastics and synthetic phthalates. The complaint cited Consumer Reports testing that found 4,217 total phthalates per serving in Poland Spring bottles.20ClassAction.org. Poland Spring Lawsuit Says Water Bottles Contain Harmful Microplastics, Phthalates The Earth Island Institute has also sued BlueTriton in Washington, D.C., alleging misleading claims about the company’s environmental sustainability practices.21Bloomberg Law. BlueTriton Brands Hit With Deception Suit Over Sustainability Those cases are separate from the mislabeling litigation and involve different claims and different courts.