Editing Snapple (section)

===Lawsuits===
In 2009, a consumer lawsuit was brought against Snapple in [[California]]. The suit alleged the drinks contained unhealthy ingredients such as [[High-fructose corn syrup|high fructose corn syrup]] and deceptive names on labels that led consumers to believe that certain healthy elements are in the drinks that are not really present.<ref name=NotNatural>{{cite web|url=http://www.wiredprnews.com/2009/03/30/lawsuit-alleges-snapple-drinks-are-not-all-natural-or-fruity_200903302958.html|title=Lawsuit Alleges Snapple Drinks Are Not All Natural or Fruity|date=30 March 2009|publisher=WiredPRNews.com|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140926052119/http://www.wiredprnews.com/2009/03/30/lawsuit-alleges-snapple-drinks-are-not-all-natural-or-fruity_200903302958.html|archive-date=26 September 2014}}</ref>

In 2010, in a lawsuit against Snapple in the federal District of New Jersey, the court certified to the FDA for an administrative determination the question whether high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) qualifies as a "natural" ingredient. In 2010, the FDA responded by letter and declined to provide the court with the requested guidance. Stating that it would take two to three years to engage in a transparent proceeding to elicit the proper public participation, the FDA again cited its limited resources and more pressing food-safety concerns.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/committees/classactions/articles/spring2012-0412-all-natural-labels-mean-marketing.html|publisher=American Bar Association|title=Confusion in Court over "All Natural" Claims|author=Goulet, Dawn|date=30 April 2012|access-date=29 December 2015|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160104183656/http://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/committees/classactions/articles/spring2012-0412-all-natural-labels-mean-marketing.html|archive-date=4 January 2016}}</ref>

In 2011, a New York federal court dismissed a different lawsuit accusing Snapple of misleading consumers by labeling drinks sweetened with high fructose corn syrup as "all natural" when the drink contained no natural juice. The court found that the plaintiffs had failed to show that they were injured as a result of Snapple's labeling.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.law360.com/articles/221637/snapple-beats-all-natural-label-suit|work=Law360|title=Snapple Beats 'All Natural' Label Suit|author=Rubenstein, Abigail|date=24 January 2011|access-date=29 December 2015|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304080444/http://www.law360.com/articles/221637/snapple-beats-all-natural-label-suit|archive-date=4 March 2016}}</ref>

After the lawsuit in May 2009, Snapple was made with [[sugar]], not [[high fructose corn syrup]]. In certain areas the older formula is still sold in stores, but this is becoming increasingly rare.{{citation needed|date=November 2020}}