Please Help Support Consumer World

MrConsumer For 27 years, Consumer World has served readers with the latest consumer news, money-saving tips, and independent investigations. It is your generosity (and not advertising alone nor corporate support) that keeps this site and Mouse Print* available as free consumer resources. So MrConsumer turns to you and humbly asks for your support again this year. Your gift will be most appreciated.
Updated every Monday!   Subscribe to free weekly newsletter.

The No Tequila in “Lime-A-Rita” Case Nears Settlement

In May, we reported that a tentative settlement was reached in a case against Anheuser-Busch for marketing its “Ritas” brand of drinks like “Lime-A-Rita,” which did not contain tequila, “Ritas Sangria Spritz,” which did not contain red wine, and “Ritas Mohito Fizz” when in fact it did not contain rum.

The only disclosure about this was on the bottom of the carton, where consumers are not likely to look nor understand that fact based on the wording they used.

Lime-a-Rita

Now the parties have reach a more specific agreement.

*MOUSE PRINT:

Settlement Class members may seek a refund for a maximum total refund of $21.25 per Household with Proof of Purchase. Settlement Class members may seek a maximum total refund of $9.75 per Household without Proof of Purchase.

A-B has also agreed to make changes to the marketing, labeling, and packaging of the Products, including the addition of the word “Malt Beverage” on the consumer facing panels of the Product packaging, and clear disclaimers on the website noting that each of the Products “Does not contain distilled spirits.”

One New Label Samplenew label

So the company will modify their labeling and pay ten or twenty dollars to affected consumers. But honestly, the mock-up of this part of their new label doesn’t seem to communicate an awful lot new in a conspicuous manner.

The judge still has to approve the settlement. We’ll provide a link in Consumer World to the claim form at that time.

Share this story:
All comments are reviewed before being published, and may be edited. Comments that are off-topic, contain personal attacks, or are otherwise inappropriate will be deleted.

7 thoughts on “The No Tequila in “Lime-A-Rita” Case Nears Settlement”

  1. 1) The lawyers get up to $2.1 million.

    2) Who in the world will have proof of purchase?

    3) How in the world are they going to identify the purchasers?

  2. Last summer we tried and enjoyed the Lime-A-Rita for what it is. And, being a careful label reader, we were quite clear before purchase that this was a malt beverage product and not a tequila product.
    Being and Anheuser-Busch product we had no great expectations for what we were buying. I am surprised the complaint prevailed and that AB is making this large of a payout.
    All I can say is, Cheers!

  3. The real-life version of Duff Brewery missed out on a chance to have Rita Moreno as its spokesman for this malt-beverage product…

  4. The new label is still a flat-out lie. A Margarita has tequila, orange liqueur. Lime-a-Rita has neither. I’m not even sure it has lime juice (OR salt on the rim), as the ingredients are listed as “Water , Corn Syrup , High Fructose Corn Syrup , Barley Malt , Citric Acid , Sodium Citrate , Natural And Artificial Flavors , Caramel Color , Hop Extract .”

    By these lax standards, they could just as easily call this “Lime-aide,” or a daiquiri, or a mojito.

    IMO, Anheuser-Busch shouldn’t be able to get away with calling it anything more suggestive than “Imitation Margar-eeta citrus-flavored beer drink”

    • Absolutely agree Alan. At best AnBev should be able to call this a “Sparkling Margarita flavored malt beverage.”

  5. I have not bought any Anheuser-Bush products for forty years. My only regret is that I cannot, in good conscience, cash in on this. I will not buy their products, but I wouldn’t pass up a chance to take some money from them.

Comments are closed.