Unilever Files Snarky Motion To Shred St. Ives Class Action
This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet
St. Ives owner lays into a putative class action denouncing the brand’s Apricot Scrub as “completely worthless” and suggesting that it damages users’ skin, contrary to claims. According to Unilever’s motion for dismissal, the plaintiffs have styled a product liability complaint as a false advertising suit in order to recover damages for a nationwide class of purchasers, but lack standing and plausibility in their claims.
You may also be interested in...
Federal judge says plaintiffs “have at best shown that St. Ives Scrub could, in theory, alter the skin’s surface.” Drug and device law attorney says the complaint "is not really a labeling issue” and the court applied “a healthy dose of common sense” in ruling.
In April 2017, Unilever failed to dismiss a putative class action in California’s Central District alleging that its St. Ives Apricot Scrub is unfit for sale due to the potential of its crushed walnut shells to cause “microtears” in skin. Now the firm seeks summary judgment in the matter, maintaining that plaintiffs are relying on “junk science” to assert the possibility of a made-up medical condition.
Rose Sheet's coverage of consumer litigation targeting personal-care companies for deceptive claims, among other alleged violations, yielded some of its most-read stories in 2017, based on online analytics. Trends are likely to carry over and, in some cases, pick up steam in 2018.