California Federal Court Permits Class Action Pet Food Lawsuit to Go Forward

A California Federal Court recently denied a motion filed by a pet food manufacturer (Defendant) to dismiss a proposed class action lawsuit centered around the alleged presence of heavy metals within the defendant’s pet food. The plaintiffs alleged that the defendant made actionable false, misleading, or otherwise deceptive statements regarding the nature and qualify of their pet food. The defendant is facing similar lawsuits in other jurisdictions, which focus on the presence of heavy metals within these pet food products. In these other lawsuits, cases…
Continue reading...

This Week’s Life Science Headlines

        Litigation …
Continue reading...

Consumer Fraud Case Moves Forward Against Non-Purchased Product

The federal district court of the Southern District of California recently added to the growing body of case law on class action claims based on false advertising, breach of warranty and consumer protection statutes.  In Dorfman v. Nutramax, the plaintiff sought to be the putative class member and alleged that Nutramax’s statement that its’ Cosamin DS and Cosamin ASU (glucosamine hydrochloride with chondroitin sulfate) was: “the ONLY brand proven effective in controlled, published U.S. clinical studies to reduce joint pain,” was false and misleading. …
Continue reading...

Banana Boat High SPF Sunscreen Class Action Survives Challenge

A California plaintiff survived a challenge to her consumer fraud complaint against Playtex Products and other makers of Banana Boat sunscreens with SPF [sun protection factor] of 85 to 110.  The critical allegation is the claim that that scientific studies show that sunscreen with SPF over 50 provides no clinically-significant benefit over the use of SPF 50 products.  Plaintiff claims the marketing of the Banana Boat products is misleading because the advertising campaign combined extreme SPF values with unproven claims of greater sun protection than…
Continue reading...

Consumer Fraud Class Action Rejected – Proposed Class Representative Inappropriate

Being close buddies with your lawyer does not always pay off – for the lawyer or the buddy. In a case against Pharmavite alleging that the labeling of its Vitamin E products is false and misleading, a California federal judge rejected a proposed plaintiff’s class action representative based on a close personal relationship between the plaintiff and plaintiff’s counsel. The court analyzed three issues: 1.) whether there is a conflict-of-interest between the class, and the plaintiff and her lawyer-friend,
2.) whether plaintiff and her lawyer-friend…
Continue reading...

Class Action Over Walgreens Supplement Survives

Walgreens Co. won a partial victory recently in New York Federal Court when the Judge dismissed warranty claims regarding its glucosamine supplements. However, the remainder of the claims in the putative class action alleging false marketing of the cartilage rebuilding powers of the product survived. To read the rest of this post, please visit Risky Business: Avoiding Product Liability, Commercial, and Other Litigation.…
Continue reading...