Federal judge issues seven-page order in Trader Joe's product-liability case

A U.S. magistrate judge cleared several procedural hurdles in a product‑liability case against Trader Joe’s and ordered an accelerated schedule that pushes the case toward dispositive motions by late spring. The consolidated seven‑page order resolved crossclaims, discovery fights, and scheduling disputes, and it instructs Trader Joe’s to file proposed pleadings that could shift fault to beverage suppliers.

The suit, styled Angela Christine Wojcik v. Trader Joe’s Company, No. 2:25‑cv‑00051‑JAD‑DJA, stems from an incident the court summarized as follows: "In November of 2022, Plaintiff Angela Christine Wojcik shopped for groceries at Trader Joe's. While putting those groceries away, a glass bottle of ale that Plaintiff purchased exploded, causing Plaintiff injuries." Wojcik’s complaint alleges negligence, strict products liability, negligent failure to inspect and warn, and breach of warranty against Trader Joe’s and Unibroue Brewery, identified in the order as the ale producer. The state court action from Clark County, Nevada was removed to federal court.

Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Albregts signed the February 3, 2026 order that resolved multiple pending motions. The order states in part: "IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Trader Joe's motion to assert crossclaim and third party claims (ECF No. 40 ) is granted. Trader Joe's must file and serve its proposed pleading. LR 15‑1(b)." The court also granted the plaintiff’s motion to supplement, noting the court would consider the proposed amended pleading attached despite a naming error, but it denied the plaintiff’s motion for a protective order "without prejudice as premature." The order further directed: "IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Trader Joe's motion to compel ( ECF No. 55 ) is granted."

The judge set concrete deadlines: "The following deadlines shall govern: Close of discovery: April 27, 2026 Dispositive motions: May 27, 2026 Pretrial order: June 26, 2026." Those dates compress the timeline for fact gathering and for any motions seeking summary judgment or dismissal.

For store employees and frontline supervisors, the rulings could have practical consequences. Granting Trader Joe’s leave to assert crossclaims and third‑party claims signals the company intends to pursue cost recovery or indemnity from producers or distributors, which may spotlight vendor quality controls and change how store managers handle incident reports. The court’s grant of the motion to compel and denial of a premature protective order indicate that internal documents and communications may be subject to discovery now, increasing the likelihood that safety logs, incident reports, training records, and supplier communications will be reviewed.

The immediate next steps on the docket include Trader Joe’s filing the required proposed crossclaim or third‑party pleading under LR 15‑1(b) and the parties completing discovery by April 27, 2026. The order concludes with its signature line: "Signed by Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Albregts on 2/3/2026."

For workers, the case underscores how a single product incident can trigger litigation that reaches into supply chains, store protocols, and personnel records. Watch for the forthcoming pleadings and discovery responses to see whether the litigation prompts changes to receiving procedures, glass‑bottle handling guidance, or in‑store safety training.