Coca-Cola has been named in a long line of lawsuits and government actions covering trade secret theft, misleading recycling and health claims, and antitrust conduct. The cases below are the ones that have produced convictions, settlements, appellate rulings, fines, or active litigation.
Trade Secret Theft Case
In 2006, a Coca-Cola executive administrative assistant, Joya Williams, conspired with Ibrahim Dimson and Edmund Duhaney to sell confidential marketing documents and a sample of a secret new product to PepsiCo for $1.5 million. PepsiCo alerted Coca-Cola, which brought in the FBI. All three were arrested in July 2006 and indicted in the Northern District of Georgia on charges including conspiracy to steal trade secrets, wire fraud, and unlawfully selling trade secrets.1U.S. Department of Justice. Three Individuals Charged With Conspiring to Steal and Sell Trade Secrets From The Coca-Cola Company
Duhaney pleaded guilty under a cooperation agreement and received two years. Dimson pleaded guilty without a deal and got five years, plus three years of supervised release and $40,000 in restitution.2U.S. Department of Justice. Former Coca-Cola Secretary Sentenced for Stealing Trade Secrets Williams went to trial, was convicted in February 2007, and was sentenced to eight years in federal prison, three years of supervised release, and $40,000 in restitution. The sentence was an upward departure from the guidelines.3CNN. Woman Gets 8 Years for Stealing Coca-Cola Secrets
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed her conviction and sentence on March 20, 2008, finding the disparity with Duhaney’s sentence justified by his cooperation.4FindLaw. United States v. Williams
Greenwashing and Recycling Lawsuits
EU Consumer Protection Complaint
In November 2023, the consumer group BEUC, joined by ClientEarth and ECOS, filed a complaint with the EU’s Consumer Protection Cooperation network alleging that Coca-Cola’s “100% recyclable” and “100% recycled” bottle labels were misleading. The complaint said the claims ignored caps and labels, recycling infrastructure limits, and the presence of virgin plastic in bottle bodies.5BEUC. Coca-Cola Promises to Tackle Greenwashing Following BEUC Complaint
On May 6, 2025, Coca-Cola committed to changes across the EU. The company agreed to add disclaimers, in the same font size as the recycling claim, clarifying that “100% recycled” applies only to the bottle body. It also agreed to stop phrases like “Recycle me again” and “Let’s meet, again!” and to drop green imagery suggesting its plastic packaging is environmentally neutral.6European Commission. Sustainable Consumption Actions National authorities are monitoring implementation.7ClientEarth. Coca-Cola to Revise Misleading Recycling Claims Following Legal Complaint
Earth Island Institute v. Coca-Cola
In June 2021, the Earth Island Institute sued Coca-Cola in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, arguing the company oversold its sustainability record while remaining one of the world’s largest producers of single-use plastic. The suit targeted specific pledges: 100% recyclable packaging by 2025, 50% recycled content by 2030, and one container recycled for every one sold by 2030.
The trial court dismissed the case, but on August 29, 2024, the D.C. Court of Appeals reversed. Associate Judge Joshua Deahl wrote that the plaintiff had “stated a facially plausible misrepresentation claim” and that Coca-Cola’s sustainability statements were not mere “puffery” beyond legal challenge.8ESG Dive. D.C. Appeals Court Rules Coca-Cola Must Face Greenwashing Lawsuit The case was sent back to the trial court and remains active.
Los Angeles County v. Coca-Cola and PepsiCo
On October 30, 2024, Los Angeles County sued Coca-Cola and PepsiCo in Los Angeles Superior Court, alleging unfair and deceptive business practices tied to plastic bottle pollution. County Counsel Dawyn R. Harrison, filing on behalf of the People of the State of California, accused both companies of a “disinformation campaign” about recyclability and of promising a “circular economy” the county says is unachievable because plastic bottles “can only be recycled once, if at all.”9KTLA. Los Angeles County Files Lawsuit Against Coca-Cola and Pepsi for Plastic Pollution The county is seeking injunctive relief, restitution, and civil penalties of up to $2,500 per violation.10Los Angeles County. LA County Sues Pepsi and Coca-Cola Over Plastic Beverage Pollution
The defendants removed the case to federal court in December 2024, but a judge sent it back to state court in March 2025. Trial is set for October 2027, with a final status conference in September 2027. Reyes Coca-Cola Bottling, LLC has demanded a jury trial.11Plastics Litigation Tracker. Plastics Litigation Tracker
Health Marketing Lawsuits
Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Complaint
In 2017, the Praxis Project and Reverends William H. Lamar IV and Delman Coates sued Coca-Cola and the American Beverage Association in D.C. Superior Court, alleging a campaign to obscure the scientific link between sugar-sweetened drinks and obesity, type 2 diabetes, and heart disease. The complaint cited $120 million in Coca-Cola-funded research between 2010 and 2015 promoting “energy balance” over reduced sugar consumption, along with campaigns like “Be OK” and “Mixify” that plaintiffs said implied exercise could offset soda’s health effects. The plaintiffs withdrew the complaint in February 2021, saying the defendants had moved away from claims that their products were unconnected to chronic disease.12Public Health Advocacy Institute. Lawsuit Alleges Coca-Cola, American Beverage Association Deceiving Public About Soda-Related Health Problems13The Praxis Project. What Has Changed Since We Filed Our Lawsuit Against a Beverage Industry Giant
Vitaminwater Class Action
In October 2009, the Center for Science in the Public Interest and co-counsel filed Ackerman et al. v. The Coca-Cola Company in the Eastern District of New York. The suit alleged that labeling Vitaminwater as “vitamins + water” that could “keep you healthy as a horse” was misleading because each bottle contained roughly eight teaspoons of sugar. A settlement finalized in March 2016 barred Coca-Cola from using the challenged health claims and required prominent packaging disclosure that the product contains sweeteners and 120 calories.14Center for Science in the Public Interest. Coca-Cola Vitaminwater
Antitrust Investigations
European Commission
The European Commission opened an investigation in May 2021 into whether Coca-Cola and its European bottlers, including Coca-Cola Hellenic Bottling Company, had abused a dominant market position. After two years, the Commission closed the file, citing “insufficient ground to continue the probe.”15Yahoo Finance. Turkey Launches Antitrust Investigation Into Coca-Cola
Turkey
In June 2025, the Turkish Competition Board opened a formal investigation into whether Coca-Cola restricted rival brands at retail locations and whether it kept commitments made to the Board in 2021. The probe involves Coca-Cola İçecek, the Turkish bottler and a subsidiary of Anadolu Group.15Yahoo Finance. Turkey Launches Antitrust Investigation Into Coca-Cola
During an October 2025 on-site inspection of Coca-Cola Satış ve Dağıtım A.Ş., an employee deleted a personal message, which the Board treated as obstruction. In November 2025 the Board imposed a fine of roughly 282.4 million Turkish lira, calculated at five per thousand of the company’s 2024 gross revenue. Coca-Cola İçecek said it would challenge the fine in court once the reasoned decision was formally issued.16Coca-Cola İçecek. The Competition Board Decision
Chile
In January 2016, twelve restaurant franchisees representing Doggis, Juan Maestro, Mamut, and Bob’s sued bottlers Embotelladora Andina S.A. and Coca-Cola Embonor S.A., alleging anti-competitive practices. The two bottlers together account for about two-thirds of the Chilean soft drinks market. Chile’s antitrust court initially ruled for the bottlers, but on December 5, 2019, the Chilean Supreme Court unanimously annulled that decision and ordered the case re-examined.17Bloomberg Law. Coca-Cola Bottlers Face New Ruling on Chile Competition Charges