Consumers v Party Animal Pet Food

Party Animal “Cocolicious” Chicken and Beef purchased by Ms. Black was found to allegedly contain Pentobarbital, an animal euthanasia drug. Additionally, the lawsuit alleges that the Party Animal brand dog foods in question are otherwise mislabeled as containing certain healthful ingredients that are not in fact included in the pet food as advertised.

The lawsuit alleges that an Illinois-based private label pet food manufacturer named Evanger’s Dog and Cat Food Company (“Evanger’s”) manufactured and canned the Party Animal “Cocolicious” branded food, and alleges that meats from dead animal processors were used to make the “organic” pet food despite being tainted with the toxic levels of Pentobarbital. Both Party Animal, Inc. and Evanger’s are named as Defendants in the case.

Roger S. Braugh, Jr., counsel for Ms. Black, stated, “We are determined to fully investigate this case to determine how and why ‘organic’ pet foods can allegedly contain Pentobarbital, and why such costly organic pet foods can also be produced and sold with allegedly misleading labels about healthy ingredients that are not actually contained in the food. We hope that this case can provide some assistance to people whose pets were injured or killed, and for consumers who may have been misled about the contents of this food. We intend to conduct a complete investigation by tracking the entire supply and distribution chain so that all responsible parties may be identified. We will follow the facts wherever they lead.”

Excerpts from the lawsuit…

On March 8, 2017 Ms. Black was then contacted by an unidentified male caller. He later identified himself as Bret Sher, and claimed he was a customer service representative of Party Animal. However it appears that he misrepresented that fact and that he is in fact affiliated with, or owner or operator of Defendant, Evanger’s Dog and Cat Food Company, Inc., who is the supplier/manufacturer for the Party Animal pet foods in question.

At all times relevant, Bret Sher insisted that Party Animal’s Cocolicious was Organic and had to go through strenuous protocols to be labeled Organic and that even though the food was made in a plant that had a prior recall, that there was no possible way the Party Animal food could be affected because it is packed by hand and the recalled food was not. Mr. Sher vehemently denied that the Party Animal pet food made by his company, Evanger’s was tainted.

Nonetheless, Mr. Sher requested that Ms. Black put all Party Animal food in her possession outside of her home and stated that FedEx would come pick it up and that he would replace the food with a different food at no cost. Ms. Black had nine cans of unopened Party Animal Chicken/Beef from lot # 0134E1523713 and ½ can of Beef and Turkey from lot # 0136E1520404 (best by July 2019) which was secured in Ms. Black’s freezer.

FedEx picked up the first box and then Ms. Black found an additional can and let Bret Sher know. Sher sent FedEx again to retrieve the pet food.

Plaintiff insisted that the subject pet food be tested for contaminants or toxic agents, but neither Party Animal nor Evanger’s would confirm that testing would or had been conducted or provide Plaintiff any further information. They were, however, very anxious to relieve Ms. Black of the food samples.

Fortunately, Ms. Black, not not allow Defendants to take away all the tainted pet food, and thereafter sought professional laboratory testing of the food. After considerable efforts, a qualified laboratory from Texas A&M University tested an unopened can of the suspect Party Animal food. The tested food contained the euthanasia drug, Pentobarbital.

Having confirmed that Party Animal’s “organic food” actually contained a drug that is specifically used to kill animals, Ms. Black set about to determine if the pet food she purchased contained any of the other promised healthy and fresh ingredients. Further testing showed that Party Animal “Cocolicious” dog foods did not contain coconut or coconut compounds as advertised. In summary, it appears that Party Animal and Evanger are preying on unsuspecting animal lovers by falsely advertising its food as organic, wholesome, fresh and as containing other healthy and natural ingredients, when in fact, the only thing different about the food is the label and its marketing scheme.

For consumers or retailers that wish to join the lawsuit – contact information for the law firm is:

“Organic” really does mean nearly nothing, owing to lack of enforcement. True organic production very intensive, and the products (in this example, meat) are/would be terribly expensive. But there is no consequence to using the term inappropriately.

Where the “rubber meets the road” is when Evanger’s (which no doubt has a Swiss Bank Account for such emergencies) offers a million dollar settlement out of court. With a $5 coupon promised to every wronged consumer. And for all records to be sealed! Whereas I believe “Nikki” truly wants reformation in the industry, we shall see what happens in this otherwise air-tight case.

What’s so fascinating is to watch morons (like the Shers) openly impersonating another entity (in the face of one lawsuit) and yet living to see another day of successful business operation. How many IPS stores have even pulled their product.

OMG!!! Sorry that this happened via injury to pets…. but what an eye-opener for the industry at large. I’m sure a lot of pet food executives and manufacturers are cleaning up their act as we speak. I am also quite shocked at the bald-faced way that Sher sought to get all the pet food in question back ASAP “Mr. Sher requested that Ms. Black put all Party Animal food in her possession outside of her home and stated that FedEx would come pick it up and that he would replace the food with a different food at no cost. ” GOOD FOR HER THAT SHE DIDN’T GIVE IT ALL BACK!!! THANK YOU !!! I wonder how many other customers just trustingly gave it all back without independent testing? Susan, Ms Black deserves some kind of TAPF award as a fellow crusader !

Between returning nearly a case of PF (assuming it would be testing, to having the food tested herself …. I wonder how the idea of a lawsuit developed? You would think, the original lawsuit against Evangers, and now including Party Animal, would be combined, for greater impact. And with PA testing for Pentobarbital too, then how sick did HER pets get? Was that the trigger for action, or in reading about Evanger’s in the first place? Yes, I can see where the claim of “organic” is an additional plot twist, but still, the claim falls back to Evanger’s failure to perform, their misrepresentation, and lack of responsibility. So will this case, also be dependent now, upon how the case against the supplier/renderer turns ou? From what we’ve read on TAPF, Regulators are supposed to be very strict about actual labeling on a can or bag. As I said in the above post, …. we shall see.

Perhaps if she joined with the other suit, she would be stuck if they decided to settle out of court and sign non-disclosure agreements. Maybe she is staying on her own because she won’t settle and she can only do that if she can’t be out voted by the other plaintiffs. Even if she tested because of the other suit, she was sold food that is adulterated and was mislabelled. Good for her.