Consumers Say it’s Premature to Toss Hyland’s False Ad Class Action

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

On Friday, consumers told a federal judge in New York that it is too early to dismiss a proposed class action lawsuit against homeopathic remedy company Hyland’s, claiming that the decision should be deferred until class certification is considered.

Plaintiffs Marie Kaatz and Abigail Gaillardi filed the lawsuit against Hyland’s and parent company Homeopathic Co. in January alleging the companies violated state consumer protection laws nationwide by selling products that are not any more effective than a placebo.

The pair also claimed that the companies violated the federal Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and New York State business practice laws.

The homeopathic remedies under fire from Hyland’s include teething gel, earache drops, gas drops as well as cough and cold syrups. The plaintiffs claim that by selling these products, Hyland’s has negligently misrepresented its products, breached its implied warranty and unjustly enriched itself.

In February, Hyland’s shot back against the lawsuit saying that the plaintiffs lacked standing to represent consumers in all 50 states which all have varied consumer protection laws. Hyland’s filed a motion asking the judge to dismiss the claims from the nationwide class and reduce the potential Class Members for New York residents only, saying the pair of plaintiffs lack standing in other states and that bringing class action claims under every state can’t be managed.

Kaatz and Gaillardi responded to the motion to dismiss by saying their suitability to represent a nationwide class should not be decided until the class is actually certified. The plaintiffs claimed, “It is well-settled that whether patients have standing to advance claims on behalf of unnamed class members under the laws of states in which they did not purchase the products are issues properly considered at the certification stage, not the motion to dismiss stage.”

The plaintiffs said they don’t disagree with keeping claims of unjust enrichment, negligent misrepresentation and violations of New York business law restricted to a New York subclass. However, they claimed that differences in the laws of various states do not preclude class certification, and striking nationwide class allegations at the pleadings stage is simply not justified.

“While defendants posit that class certification will make this case unmanageable, pre-certification discovery has yet to be conducted,” asserted Kaatz and Gaillardi. “Nor have defendants demonstrated, from the face of the complaint, that it would be impossible for plaintiffs to make the requisite showing to support class certification.”

Kaatz and Gaillardi are represented by Jason P. Sultzer, Joseph Lipari and Jean M. Sedlak of The Sultzer Law Group PC.

The Hyland’s Homeopathic Baby Products Class Action Lawsuit is Marie Kaatz, et al. v. Hyland’s Inc., et al., Case No. 7:16-cv-00237, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.