OAKLAND, Calif. (Legal Newsline) – Class action lawyers given the green light to sue S.C. Johnson & Son have filed a motion that, if granted, could prove costly for the company.
The Clarkson Law Firm and Moon Law on Dec. 20 asked a federal judge to certify a class of consumers they say were misled by claims made on Ecover cleaning products like laundry detergent and dishwasher tablets that are marketed as having plant-based ingredients. The lawsuit says consumers are tricked into thinking they only contain healthy ingredients despite the presence of synthetic materials.
In May, Oakland, Calif., magistrate judge Thomas Hixson denied all seven of S.C. Johnson’s arguments for dismissal, which included the fact that the synthetic ingredients’ presence is disclosed on the back on an ingredients list.
But reasonable consumers aren’t expected to read such a list, Hixson wrote. Now, lawyers want the court to certify a class of Ecover customers – an outcome that would certainly increase the value of a potential future settlement far past a payoff made only to the named plaintiff.
“Not only do the labels contain statements and imagery expounding this purported product-feature, but Defendant used highly contrasting colors and deliberately allocated a large portion of the Products’ labeling to grab the customers’ attention and to impress upon them that the Products do not contain synthetic ingredients,” the motion for class certification says.
“Defendant did this to achieve as much market share as possible in the billion-dollar natural-products industry.”
Key in Hixson’s May ruling was his decision to let plaintiff Elizabeth Maisel pursue claims regarding Ecover products she never bought. He found claims made regarding all Ecover products were similar enough that she didn’t need to buy them all to have standing.
“Given the weight of authority finding plausible similar plant-based representations and analogous representations, such as ‘naturally derived,’ the court finds Maisel’s allegations plausible under the reasonable consumer test,” Hixson wrote.
“(A)lthough the products do not make any objective representations about the amount of plant-based and mineral ingredients, it is plausible that a reasonable consumer could be deceived into thinking the products only contain ingredients that come from plants and/or from plants and minerals.”
Plaintiffs lawyers seek two classes - one nationwide and one limited to California. They would be made up of customers who bought Ecover products within the relevant statute of limitations periods.
Plaintiff Maisel would be the class representative and entitled to an incentive award later.