A group of consumers all purchased Cheez-It crackers that were labeled "Made with Whole Grain." There is an "original" flavor of Cheez-Its and a "Made with Whole Grain Flavor" that carries the large label on the front about its ingredients. The consumers filed suit against Kellogg's alleging that they were deceived because they believed the crackers were "predominantly whole grain," when, in fact, the crackers were made predominantly from enriched white flour.

The federal district judge held that disclosures on the side of the box were sufficient to explain the "multigrain" claim. "Whole wheat flour" is listed as a second or third ingredient in the crackers.

The consumers appealed the dismissal and the appellate court held that the verbiage on the side and front bottom of the box that explained the grams of whole grain were insufficient to counter the belief a reasonable consumer would have from seeing the bold front-of-the-package claims that the crackers were made from "predominantly whole grain."

Lawyers for the consumers have argued that consumers should have the right to rely on the bold claims on product packaging and not have to resort to the "fine print" to determine the contents of the product. The case will now proceed to trial. If you were on the jury in the case, what would your decision be and why? [Mantikas v Kellogg Company, 910 F.3d 633 (2nd. Cir. 2018)]