The wordplay on a class-action lawsuit filed in federal court in Rochester the other day was irresistible: Comfort v. Ricola.

Ricola would be the Swiss cough drop company famous for booming alpenhorns and mountaintop chants of “REE-CO-LAH” in its ads. Comfort would be Amy Comfort, a Steuben County woman and the lead plaintiff.

Comfort contends the company’s use of the phrase “naturally soothing” on its packaging is fraudulent because its cough drops contain “unnatural, synthetic, artificial, and/or genetically modified ingredients.”

The phrase, Comfort claims, duped countless “reasonable consumers” like her to buy Ricola lozenges, in her case at a Walgreens in Corning.

Now she wants Ricola to cough up $5 million to her and other allegedly hoodwinked reasonable consumers. Oh, yeah, and to her lawyers.

This lawsuit REEKS-A-LOT like a money grab.

There is a tidal wave of class-action food labeling litigation flooding federal courts right now, led by lawyers looking to cash in on subjective interpretations of marketing terms like “natural” and “healthy.”

A U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform study found 425 active cases between 2015 and 2016 compared to just 19 in 2008. A fifth were in New York, which, according to the group, bears the highest annual cost of tort litigation of any state at $6,066 per household.

“We’re not saying this particular case should or shouldn’t be brought,” said the group’s spokesman, Bryan Quigley. “But let’s not fool ourselves into thinking this is a consumer-driven case to help people, and the lawyers are there to bring justice.

“This is lawyer-driven litigation for the purposes of a settlement that often enriches the plaintiffs’ firm and gives the broad class pennies or coupons.”

Some recent headline grabbers include:

A Buffalo woman who led a class-action against the manufacturer of Canada Dry Ginger Ale because the soda didn’t contain real ginger.

A class-action lawsuit out of Albany that claimed the American Heart Association’s logo on StarKist Tuna misrepresented the brand as healthier than other tunas.

A Manhattan woman who sued Tootsie Roll Industries on behalf of Junior Mints consumers, claiming half her box of Junior Mints was filled with air, despite the weight of the candy being listed on the package.

The latter case was tossed by a judge who said, “The law simply does not provide the level of coddling the plaintiff seeks.”

No one wants to fall victim to false advertising, and there should be recourse for consumers who’ve been legitimately defrauded. Companies that engage in bogus marketing should get pinched, like tobacco companies.

But what reasonable consumer has been aggrieved by the claims in such cases or, in this case, the term “naturally soothing?”

None, says Adam Morey, of the Lawsuit Reform Alliance of New York.

“When judges throw these cases out, they often do so on the grounds that a reasonable consumer would not find that to be injurious,” Morey said. “This looks like one of those cases.”

In her complaint, Comfort alleges “naturally soothing” is misleading because Ricola lozenges contain synthetic ingredients, including aspartame, ascorbic acid, citric acid, and malic acid.

Some of those ingredients can be created artificially, but some are also naturally occurring, said Roger Clemens, a University of Southern California food safety expert who advises food companies and law firms on such cases.

“If you suck on an apple, you’re going to get a lot more malic acid than you will sucking on a lozenge,” Clemens said.

The lawsuit underscores the ambiguity around the definition of “natural.”

The Food and Drug Administration doesn’t have one, although the agency’s longstanding policy is to regard “natural” as meaning “nothing artificial or synthetic” has been added to the food “that would not normally be expected to be in that food.”

The lack of clarity has contributed to lawsuits like this. Regardless, Clemens said, consumers should be most concerned with safety and none of the ingredients listed in Comfort’s lawsuit against Ricola are unsafe.

“‘Natural’ does not mean ‘safe.’ ‘Natural’ does not mean ‘healthy,’” Clemens aid. “It’s been a highly-regarded product for decades. In my opinion, this is looking for deep pockets.”

Comfort did not return a message left via social media.

An almost identical lawsuit against Ricola filed in Manhattan in 2015 was dismissed two months later, although it was impossible to tell from the dismissal order whether the company settled.

Lawyers for Ricola and the plaintiffs in that case didn’t respond to inquiries. The plaintiffs’ lawyer was C.K. Lee, whose law firm has reportedly brought more than 1,000 class-action cases in the last decade.

One of them claimed consumers were tricked by oversized Advil bottles, although the bottles listed the pill count. The judge who tossed the case said the claim “does not pass the laugh test.”

The latest case against Ricola ought to have a judge laughing so hard she’ll need a lozenge.

David Andreatta is a Democrat and Chronicle columnist. He can be reached at dandreatta@gannett.com.