1 of 15

Week 7 Assignment

Course Project

TIMOTHY ODOM / BUSN311 B002 WINTER 2026

2 of 15

Slide 3 - Introduction
Slide 4 - Case Study
Slide 5 - Dilemma
Slide 6 - Law Violations
Slide 7 - Legal Results
Slide 8 - Harmful Results
Slide 9 - Egoism
Slide 10 - Egoism Correlation
Slide 11 - Virtue Ethics
Slide 12 - Additional Litigation
Slide 13 - Take-Away

AGENDA

3 of 15

Company:

Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp.

Type Of Business:

Beech-Nut is a privately held food production company

Corporate Structure:

Focused, vertical management structure

Introduction

4 of 15

Case Study

Founded in New York in 1891
Expansion of products
Baby food since 1931
Company merges
Sold to Nestlé S.A.

5 of 15

Dilemma

Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp. committed food fraud
Universal Juice Co.
Warning to Nestlé
1982 Private Investigator

In 1977, the company switched to a new apple concentrate supplier called Universal Juice Co. because their production cost was below the market. Company research scientists suspected that the juice may be adulterated with corn syrup based on testing, but company executives chose to ignore the concerns (“History of Beech-Nut Nutrition Corporation.”)(Everstine, Spink, & Kennedy).
When Beech-Nut was sold to Nestlé, the director of research and development conducted further testing and warned senior management of his concerns regarding the adulteration. The company chose not to take further action of investigating the apple juice further (“History of Beech-Nut Nutrition Corporation.”)(Everstine, Spink, & Kennedy).
In 1982, definite proof came when a private investigator, for the Apple Processors Trade Association found that the apple juice was concocted of water, sugars, flavoring, and coloring and that they were failing to add the apples at all (“History of Beech-Nut Nutrition Corporation.”).
So despite their marketing of producing and selling real, high quality, organic food for a healthier babies and toddlers, Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp. chose the cheaper option of committing food fraud and intentionally allowing the adulteration of their apple juice for financial advantage rather than selling an honest product (“History of Beech-Nut Nutrition Corporation.”)(Everstine, Spink, & Kennedy).

6 of 15

“The largest consumer

fraud case ever."

Immediate response
470 Violations

Law Violations

Rather than immediately recalling all products from the synthetic concentrate (700,000 cases of inventory), Beech-Nut began shipping the tainted juice out of the country (“History of Beech-Nut Nutrition Corporation.”).
Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp. was found to have violated 470 counts of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“History of Beech-Nut Nutrition Corporation.”).
The violations were concerned with:

21 U.S.C. §301 et seq: Regulates the safety, labeling, and quality of food, drugs, medical devices, and cosmetics in the United States (“U.S. v. Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp.”).
21 U.S.C. § 331(a): Prohibits the introduction or delivery for introduction into interstate commerce of any food that is adulterated or misbranded (“U.S. v. Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp.”).
21 U.S.C. § 342(b)(1) and (2): Defines adulterated food as containing poisonous or deleterious substances, or if valuable constituents are omitted or abstracted (“U.S. v. Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp.”).
18 U.S.C. § 371: Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United State (“U.S. v. Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp.”).

7 of 15

Legal Results

215 of 470 Violations and $2 million
A year and a day in prison and $100,000

8 of 15

Over 20% to under 16%
Attempts to regain customers
Ralston Purina Co. purchased Beech-Nut

Harmful Results

The apple juice sales continued to grow until after the indictments of the company (“History of Beech-Nut Nutrition Corporation.”).
Market shares dropped from over 20% to under 16% (“History of Beech-Nut Nutrition Corporation.”).
Beech-Nut spent millions trying to recapture consumer confidence by launching a new promotional campaign, being the first major firm to remove modified starches from their food, and urging customers to read the labels of their products and compare them with their competitors (“History of Beech-Nut Nutrition Corporation.”). They successfully regained some of its lost market share, but the campaign cost pretty much wiped out profit margins (“History of Beech-Nut Nutrition Corporation.”).
Had the company immediately recalled all products from the synthetic concentrate rather than shipping it out of the country they most likely would have actually gone bankrupt long before (“History of Beech-Nut Nutrition Corporation.”).
In 1989, Ralston Purina Co. purchased Beech-Nut from Nestlé (“History of Beech-Nut Nutrition Corporation.”).

9 of 15

Ethical Framework:

Egoism

Definition of Egoism:

Egoism claims that actions are morally right if they maximize one's own long-term, self-regarding welfare

Explanation of Egoism:

Individuals ought to act in their own self-interest.

Egoism

10 of 15

Egoism Correlation

Prioritization of short-term corporate profit and company survival over consumer health and safety
Financial trouble & their attempt at “fake it, until you make it”

11 of 15

Virtue Ethics

Alternative Ethical Framework:

Virtue Ethics

Definition of Virtue Ethics:

Virtue ethics focuses on the character, moral virtues, and integrity of the individual actor rather than on rules or consequences

Explanation of Virtue Ethics:

The thought of "What kind of person should I be?"

12 of 15

Toxic heavy metals in baby food
2021 - present
Tort claims, violations of consumer protection regulations, and fraudulent misrepresentation
Arsenic, lead, cadmium, and mercury

Additional Litigation

13 of 15

Take-Away

Establish third-party verification for ingredient sourcing to ensure product integrity.
Establish stringent, transparent supply chain audits.

14 of 15

Work Cited

“Ages - Beech-Nut.” Beech, 31 Aug. 2017, www.beechnut.com/ages/pouches/?gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=20953154860&gbraid=0AAAAADoQp8dQkmrP6itNzk7I4SGLHqRY6&gclid=Cj0KCQiA7-rMBhCFARIsAKnLKtCx2z_lkJzuwQtAH3hfREVXiX5n0qOaLyxRZniomhLFEDSjAA-Gf9IaAvScEALw_wcB.
“History of Beech-Nut Nutrition Corporation.” FundingUniverse, www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/beech-nut-nutrition-corporation-history/. Accessed 22 Feb. 2026.
“U.S. v. Beech-Nut Nutrition Corp..” vLex, case-law.vlex.com/vid/u-s-v-beech-888331242#:~:text=Defendants%20Neils%20L.,and%20in%20instructing%20the%20jury. Accessed 8 Feb. 2026.
Bair, Emily C. “A Narrative Review of Toxic Heavy Metal Content of Infant and Toddler Foods and Evaluation of United States Policy.” Frontiers in Nutrition, U.S. National Library of Medicine, 27 June 2022, pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC9271943/#:~:text=Adverse%20effects%20of%20inorganic%20contaminant,effects%20(3%2C%204).
Buder, L. (1988, Feb 18). 2 former executives of Beech-Nut guilty in phony juice case. New York Times. http://ezproxy.apus.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.proquest.com%2Fnewspapers%2F2-former-executives-beech-nut-guilty-phony-juice%2Fdocview%2F426744264%2Fse-2%3Faccountid%3D8289

15 of 15

Work Cited

Everstine, K., Spink, J., & Kennedy, S. (2013). Economically motivated adulteration (EMA) of food: Common characteristics of EMA incidents. Journal of Food Protection, 76(4), 723-35. http://ezproxy.apus.edu/login?qurl=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.proquest.com%2Fscholarly-journals%2Feconomically-motivated-adulteration-ema-food%2Fdocview%2F1335047045%2Fse-2%3Faccountid%3D8289
LaMotte, Sandee. “Leading Baby Food Manufacturers Knowingly Sold Products with High Levels of Toxic Metals, a Congressional Investigation Found.” CNN, Cable News Network, 5 Feb. 2021, www.cnn.com/2021/02/04/health/baby-food-heavy-metal-toxins-wellness#:~:text=Beech%2DNut%20also%20used%20%E2%80%9Cmany,per%20billion%2C%20the%20report%20said.
Ottosen, E. (2023). Egoism as a Problem for Robust Moral Realism. Religions, 14(10), 1315. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel14101315
Refashioning Second-Hand Clothes Consumption Through Pleasure, Pain, Seduction and Conversion: A Virtue Ethics Perspective: JBE. (2025). Journal of Business Ethics, 196(4), 863-881. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-024-05874-x
You, L. (2024). The Impact of Social Norms of Responsibility on Corporate Social Responsibility Short Title: The Impact of Social Norms of Responsibility on Corporate Social Responsibility: JBE. Journal of Business Ethics, 190(2), 309-326. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-023-05417-w