The lawsuit claims that while Beneful is advertised as a healthful and nutritional dog food, the Lucido' experience and others has been the opposite. Specifically, the lawsuit claims that Beneful dog foods contain propylene glycol, which is "an automotive component that is a known animal toxin and is poisonous to cats and dogs."
Further, the Lucidos claim that Beneful also contains mycotoxins, which are "a group of toxins produced by fungus that occurs in grains, which are a principle ingredient in Beneful."The lawsuit cites the Association for Truth In Pet Food, which tested "Beneful Original and found that it contained dangerous levels of mycotoxins."
According to the complaint, Lucido had a German Shepherd, an English Bulldog and a Labrador. In late December 2014 or January 2015 he purchased his first bag of Beneful dog food which he fed to each dog and which each dog began eating exclusively. On January 15, Lucido' German Shepherd began to lose a large amount of hair and he began to have an unusual odor. Two days later the German Shepherd became violently ill, the lawsuit claims.
After being examined by a veterinarian, it was determined that the German Shepherd was suffering from internal bleeding in the dog' stomach and the liver was also malfunctioning, which the veterinarian said was "consistent with poisoning." Then, on January 23, the Lucidos found their English Bulldog dead in the yard. "Post-mortem veterinary examination revealed signs of internal bleeding in the dog' stomach and lesions on his liver, much like [the German Shepherd],"the class action lawsuit claims. The Lucido' Labrador is also now ill and is being tested for similar problems.
According to the lawsuit, the Lucidos "have suffered economic losses including the purchase price of Beneful and veterinary and related medical expenses"as result of the harm Beneful caused their dogs.
The lawsuit states that over 3,000 similar complaints have been posted by dog owners on the Internet "about dogs becoming ill, in many cases very seriously ill, and/or dying after eating Beneful."
"The dogs show consistent symptoms, including stomach and related internal bleeding, liver malfunction or failure, vomiting, diarrhea, dehydration, weight loss, seizures, bloating, and kidney failure,"the lawsuit states.
The lawsuit seeks representation for two classes, specifically, a nationwide class and a California subclass for dog owners "who purchased Beneful dog food in the past four years and who incurred any out of pocket costs due to illness, injury or death of their dog resulting from the ingestion of Beneful."
The class action lawsuit claims Nestle Purina is in breach of implied warranty, breach of express warranty, negligence, negligent misrepresentation, strict products liability, violating California' consumer legal remedies act, violating California' Unfair Competition Law, and violating California' False Advertising Law.
The Lucidos are represented by Jeffrey B. Cereghino of Ram, Olson, Cereghino & Kopcyzynski, by John Yanchunis of Morgan & Morgan Complex Litigation Group, by Karl Molineux of Merrill, Nomura & Molineux, and by Donna F. Solen of Kimbrell Kimbrell & Solen LLC.
The Beneful Toxic Dog Food Class Action Lawsuit is Frank Lucido v. Nesltle Purina Petcare Company, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.