Sugar, corn industries sugar-coat court fight

A representative for corn refiners declined to comment. Opening statements started earlier this month.

Both industries “continue their commitments to practices that encourage safe and healthful use of their products, including moderation in the consumption of table sugar, high fructose corn syrup and other sweeteners”, the parties said.

The corn refiners countersued, saying the Sugar Association falsely claimed in its newsletter that corn syrup causes obesity and cancer.

Plaintiffs were The Sugar Association, Inc.; C & H Sugar Co., Inc.; United States Sugar Corp.; American Sugar Refining, Inc.; The Amalgamated Sugar Company L.L.C.; Imperial Sugar Corp.; MinnDak Farmers Cooperative; Western Sugar Cooperative; MI Sugar Co.; and the American Sugar Cane League U.S.A., Inc.

Eric Rose, a spokesman for the sugar processors, said they “achieved a satisfactory settlement of the disputes in the lawsuit”.

In 2012, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration rejected an appeal by America’s corn refiners to change the sweetener’s name on food packages from high-fructose corn syrup to corn sugar.

In fact, Webb told the jury, HFCS is “nutritionally equivalent to sugar” and is simply a “form of sugar made from corn”. On the basis of a false-advertising claim, sugar producers were seeking $1.5 billion in the case, according to a report by the Associated Press (AP).

The case in a federal district court in Los Angeles came amid growing anxiety among consumers over sweeteners.

The sugar trade group’s real gripe against HFCS is that the corn refiners “took a large market share from the sugar companies”, up to 50 percent of the market by 2003, Webb said.

Both parties agreed to the settlement on Friday at the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Los Angeles). The corn refiners, in a countersuit, sought $530 million.