Judge Cuts Down Honeywell Humidifier Class Action Lawsuit

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.

A federal judge has denied in part a motion to dismiss a Honeywell humidifier class action lawsuit, deciding that at this stage the majority of the contractual claims of the plaintiff are plausible on their face.

Plaintiff Charles Leach alleges that the Honeywell humidifier he purchased began leaking, requiring the use of towels to prevent water from damaging other items and leading to scaling on the humidifier itself. According to the humidifier class action lawsuit, Honeywell failed to fulfill its warranty because it did not send a replacement part to the plaintiff and required him to pay for an independent repair person to inspect the device.

U.S. District Judge Lee T. Sorokin noted in his order that at this stage, arguments in a class action lawsuit must be read in the light most favorable to the plaintiff. He upheld many of the claims relating to breaches of various contracts although denied others linked more closely to personal injury. Charles Leach has “has alleged sufficient facts supporting a claim the [Honeywell] humidifier did not meet reasonable consumer expectations because it is plausible a reasonable consumer would expect the Humidifier not to leak, not to scale and to function as promised.”

Judge Sorokin noted that the plaintiff had adequately demonstrated that there was an express warranty in place regarding the Honeywell humidifier. If the facts are taken as they appear in the class action lawsuit, he wrote, then it is feasible that the company failed to address the man’s complaints. Further, accepting as true the allegations regarding the device’s failure, Honeywell may have breached the express warranty of merchantability by not producing it in a manner that would not have allegedly led to leaking.

However, two distinct claims did fail. The order granted the motion to dismiss counts of negligent misrepresentation as well as breach of implied warranty of fitness. The judge wrote that case law regarding the former requires an actual physical injury which Leach had not suffered. In addition, an implied warranty of fitness is a promise made to a specific person; Judge Sorokin found no evidence Honeywell had done so in this case.

Even state law claims and a count of unjust enrichment held up in the class action lawsuit. Judge Sorokin noted that the putative Class can allege alternative theories of damages so that even if the breach of contract claims fail, Leach and others can still seek damages on allegations of unjust enrichment. He also wrote that if the Honeywell humidifier did not operate as advertised, Massachusetts state law may also govern how the company treated the warranty.

Leach is represented by Mirabella Law LLC, Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca LLP, Halunen & Associates, Lockridge Grindal Nauen PLLP and Audet & Partners LLP.

The Honeywell Humidifier Class Action Lawsuit is Charles Leach v. Honeywell International Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-12245, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

UPDATE: On Dec. 8, 2016, Honeywell and a group of consumers are attempting to settle class action lawsuits alleging defects caused Honeywell’s TrueSTEAM humidifiers to leak very hot water. The parties asked a Pennsylvania federal court last week to postpone deadlines while they worked out an agreement.

UPDATE 2: The Honeywell’s TrueSTEAM Humidifier class action settlement is now open. Click here to file a claim.