Every Man Jack Class Action Says Grooming Products Not ‘Naturally Derived’

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 California consumer is suing the makers of Every Man Jack personal grooming products, claiming the company falsely advertises its products as all-natural, when they actually contain synthetic ingredients.

Plaintiff Garret Shank filed the proposed class action lawsuit against Presidio Brands Inc. Tuesday in California federal court.

Shank says he purchased several Every Man Jack products from various Target stores including Every Man Jack Face Lotion, Every Man Jack Face Lotion with SPF, Every Man Jack Face Scrub, and Every Man Jack Face Wash.

According to the class action lawsuit, Presidio claims its Every Man Jack grooming products are “naturally derived.”  This claim is coupled with images of plants and trees, which allegedly gives the impression that the products’ ingredients are all natural, plant-based and do not contain synthetic, artificial, or toxic ingredients.

However, Shank contends that this type of advertising is a ploy to deceive health-minded and environmentally conscious consumers into purchasing the products because they actually contain multiple ingredients that are artificial.

Specifically, the lawsuit says, Every Man Jack products contain not so natural ingredients that include synthetic polymers Aluminum Hydroxide and Cetyl Dimethicone, synthetic preservatives Potassium Sorbate, Sodium Benzoate and Phenoxyethanol, among other reportedly toxic surfactants and substances.

Shank says he was duped by Presidio’s marketing of the Every Man Jack products, believing that the grooming line contained only natural or naturally derived ingredients and would not have purchased the grooming care products had the true nature of the ingredients been disclosed to him.

“Consumers lack the meaningful ability to test or independently ascertain or verify whether a product is natural or naturally derived, especially at the point of sale. Consumer would not, and could not know, the true nature of products’ ingredients merely by reading the ingredients label,” the lawsuit asserts.

As a result of these purported false representations, consumers have suffered out-of-pocket costs, while Presidio has realized substantial profits.

“Presidio knows, or should reasonably know, that consumers prefer natural, ‘naturally derived’, and plant-based products. Presidio knows that consumers will pay a premium for these products or would not purchase the products at all unless they were natural, ‘naturally derived’, and/or plant-based, as advertised,” the class action states.

Shank brings this lawsuit alleging Presidio violated numerous consumer protection laws including California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act. He seeks to represent a certified nationwide Class of consumers who purchased any Every Man Jack brand product containing artificially-processed and synthetic ingredients that were labeled or marketed as ‘naturally derived’, along a California subclass and a CLRA subclass.

The lawsuit is requesting compensatory, exemplary, and statutory damages along with a declaration that Presidio must disgorge all or part of the ill-gotten profits it received from the sale of Every Man Jack products or make full restitution to the plaintiff and proposed Class Members.

Shank is represented by Lee A. Cirsch, Robert K. Friedl, and Trisha K. Monesi of Capstone Law APC.

The Every Man Jack Deceptive Labeling Class Action Lawsuit is Shank v. Presidio Brands Inc., Case No. 3:17-cv-00232, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.