Rhythm of Islam and Stories Behind the Songs on DVD $19.95
	Islamic Books > History > Cultural Atlas of Islam $59.95
	Islamic Videos > Lecture > Dr. Ahmadullah Siddiqui > The Life of Abu Bakr $12.95 $9.95

The case against McDonald's

Basis of the Case

McDonald’s ("McD’s") fast food restaurant is involved in a class action lawsuit brought by a group of Hindus, vegetarians, and Kosher observers spanning five states: California, Washington, New Jersey and Illinois and Texas.

The basis of the lawsuit focuses on McD’s claims, made in connection with its switch to vegetable oil for its fryers in 1991, that its french fries and hashbrowns were vegetarian (cooked in vegetable oil and absent any animal by-products). In actuality, at the time of the change McD’s began spraying these products, at their food processing plants, with a beef tallow based flavoring to preserve their traditional taste. This flavoring was identified as "natural flavoring" by McD’s with no reference to its beef origins. These plaintiffs contend that they relied on McD’s statements that their french fries were vegetarian, that they purchased and consumed the products based on that reliance, that McD’s "natural flavoring" label was misleading and that they would not have consumed these products if they not been misled about the presence of beef tallow in the product.

What Is a Class Action?

This is a type of lawsuit opens the door to a specific class of people rather than being limited to the plaintiffs themselves. The class described in the lawsuit is not limited to Hindu, Vegetarians, and Kosher individuals; rather, it includes them among any others who meet the class qualifications, such as Muslims who observe the Zabiha diet.

The Settlement

McD’s agreed to settle the case for $10 million to be paid to a fund to be paid to vegetarian, Hindu and kosher related groups as well as children’s charities. The judge at the preliminary settlement hearing approved the settlement and the cy pres fund (where the money goes) in May. The money is split amongst the interest groups as follows: $2 million to the Hindu groups (there are 2 million Hindus in the US), $1 million to the kosher groups (7 million kosher observers in the US), $6 million to vegetarian groups (15 million vegetarian in the US), and, $1 million will be going to children’s charities. No provision has been made for inclusion of any Muslim groups in this distribution.

Additionally, McD’s agreed to publicly apologize for this act and to create a food council that includes representatives of these groups. Again, Muslims are not included on the food council.

The final settlement hearing is scheduled for August 22.

Muslim Involvement

One of the named plaintiffs, Cherie Travis, has a classmate who is Muslim and the two discussed the concern of this exclusion of Muslims. Ms. Travis then chose to oppose the settlement at its preliminary hearing on the grounds that Muslims were dismissed from the settlement although they have an equal interest in the settlement. Subsequently, Cherie, her attorney and various Muslim representatives have discussed the situation and the best plan for the Muslim American community.

The judge at the preliminary hearing supported the exclusion of the Muslim community from participating in the economic component of the Settlement. He stated that it was his opinion that the Muslim community interests are met by the vegetarians’ coverage of the settlement. This leaves Muslims with three choices: accept our exclusion and disparate treatment, object to the settlement or create our own case against McD’s by exercising our right to opt out of the proposed settlement.

>Opt-out: Sending an opt-out letter means that even if the settlement goes through, your rights are not going with it. Bottom line, you, in coordination with others, can sue McD’s after the settlement is complete. For those who observe the Zabiha diet, relied on McD’s word and then stopped eating their fries/hashbrowns upon learning the truth, this is a meaningful alternative and there are attorneys who have been identified to handle this case on a contingency (no cost to you) basis.

If the court receives 200 or more opt-out letters, McD’s has the right to reject the settlement and either defend the case or look for a deal which is acceptable to the opt outs and the other plaintiffs. McD’s could also complete the settlement and deal with the opt-outs separately. The choice is McD’s.

>Objecting: This choice means that although you are accepting that you are a part of the class but that you object to the settlement and seek to have the court reject it as unfair, insufficient or inequitable. For instance, a Muslim who does not observe the Zabiha diet would contend that this settlement is wrong and unacceptable in excluding the many Muslims you know who were misguided by McD’s. Note: this group of people may not sue McD’s later on.

Critical Date: July 8

The court must receive any opt-out letters or objection letters prior to this date. Any day thereafter, the 9^th, 10^th, etc, will be ineffective.

We urge all those who want the Muslim community to be recognized on equal footing as those who have the same concern to send their letter now — not later today, not tomorrow, but now! A sample of the letter can be found at the SoundVision.com website. (link here)

Finances

Can a case succeed on a shoestring budget? Let’s not find out the hard way. Ms. Travis’ attorney, Greg Kazarian, has been objecting to this settlement because he feels it is unfair. He identified the issue of the disparate treatment of the Muslim community and is preparing objections on that basis. He feels it’s wrong to exclude Muslims and will do his best to win the case with whatever funds he has. Naturally, the more money he has to invest in the case, the more proof he can include to show that Muslims were either ignored or excluded from the case.

One goal that Mr. Kazarian has is to get the depositions from witnesses who participated in the settlement discussions. Some of these witnesses are outside of Illinois and Illinois law requires Mr. Kazarian to travel to that state to depose them. Thus, this will cost money: the travel, hiring a stenographer, paying for the transcripts, etc. But in exchange, we get a more airtight case.

We have decide to create a legal defense fund to support our objection to the settlement because of its exclusion of the Muslim community. These funds will be made available to Mr. Kazarian to cover expenses incurred in preparing our objection for presentation to the court at the Hearing and identifying evidence helpful to our claim. We would appreciate your support of this Fund. Contributions to the fund will be repaid if we are successful at obtaining money from McD’s either to settle our complaints or as a result of a ruling in our favor. Your contribution will be placed in a client escrow expense account and will be used as approved by Sr. Janaan Hashim & Abdul Malik Mujahid..

If you wish to support this effort you may send your contribution to the Fund to

McDonald’s Objector Fund
c/o Greg Kazarian, Esq.
Pedersen & Houpt, P.C.
161 N. Clark #3100
Chicago, IL 60601