Ulta Used Makeup Class Action Seeks Class Cert.

Plaintiffs have filed a motion to certify their proposed Class Members, including consumers from 17 states, in an Ulta used makeup class action lawsuit.

The plaintiffs alleged in their Ulta class action lawsuit filed in early 2018 that the makeup retailer repackaged used makeup to resell to customers. According to the complaints, former Ulta employees confessed to making returned used make up items look new, but not sanitizing them, and putting them back on the shelves for sale at the direction of management.

The plaintiffs seek to represent a variety of consumers and propose a number of different class periods.

“The ‘Class Period’ for each claim extends backward the length of the statute of limitations from the date that the class representative filed the claim and continues until the date a judgment is entered,” note the plaintiffs in their motion.

According to the plaintiffs in the Ulta used makeup class action lawsuit, millions of consumers were affected by the practice. Specifically, the plaintiffs want to represent those who purchased items from Ulta retail stores in Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Michigan, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Washington, and Wisconsin.

The chain of beauty stores attempted to escape the Ulta used makeup class action lawsuit by arguing the plaintiffs overreached in their claims. Ulta pointed out that not all of the products sold were unsanitized, repackaged returns – some were new.

In response, the plaintiffs contended that all Ulta customers were injured because they would not have shopped at the chain had they known they were potentially buying used makeup. The plaintiffs pointed out the new and used products were “comingled” and there was no way to know off hand if the item they selected for purchased was a repackaged return.

The Ulta used makeup class action lawsuit was filed after a former Ulta employee revealed on social media that she had been instructed to return used makeup to the sales floor to be offered at full price. According to the complaint, other Ulta employees backed up her statements.

Ulta, alleged the plaintiffs, was known for a generous returns policy, allowing customers to return products if they were unhappy with it for any reason. However, the returns policy allegedly spurred a “dark” practice of returning the used items to be sold to unsuspecting customers at full price.

According to the Ulta used makeup class action lawsuit, the returned items were not sanitized in any way before they were put back on the shelf.

The Ulta consumers are represented by Carl Malmstrom and Janine Pollack of Wolf Haldenstein Alder Freeman & Herz LLP; Lee Shalov, Jason Giaimo and Wade Wilkinson of McLaughlin & Stern LLP; Thomas Zimmerman Jr., Matthew De Re and Sharon Harris of Zimmerman Law Offices; and Theodore Bell.

The Ulta Used Makeup Class Action Lawsuit is Smith-Brown, et al. v. Ulta Beauty Inc., et al., Case No. 1:18-cv-00610, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

Read More Lawsuit & Settlement News:

9/11 Victims Compensation Fund Bill Passes House

iPhone Class Action Claims Apple ‘Throttled’ Older Models

Asbestos Cancer Risks Remain After Decades of Regulation

PNY Class Action Challenges Power Bank Charge