Mattel class action claims ‘Wicked’ dolls’ packaging featured adult site

Mattel class action lawsuit overview: 

• Who: Plaintiff Holly Ricketson filed a class action lawsuit against Mattel Inc. 
• Why: Ricketson claims Mattel sold “Wicked” dolls advertised for children ages 4 and up in packaging containing a link to an explicit website. 
• Where: The class action lawsuit was filed in California federal court.

A new class action lawsuit alleges that Mattel sold “Wicked” dolls advertised for kids in packages containing a link to a website with adult content. 

Holly Ricketson’s class action lawsuit claims the “Wicked”’ dolls, which were based on the main characters of the recently released musical film, were “unfit for their intended use” as dolls for children ages 4 and up due to the presence of the link. 

“Plaintiff and consumers did not know, and did not have a reason to know, that the products purchased would contain access to such an inappropriate web link given that product was advertised for ages 4 years and above,” the Mattel class action says. 

While Mattel issued a recall for the Wicked dolls, it did not offer refunds to consumers who had already purchased them, the Mattel Wicked dolls class action alleges. 

Ricketson wants to represent a nationwide class of consumers who purchased a Mattel Wicked dolls product in packaging containing a link to the explicit website. 

Mattel declined to refund consumers who purchased now-recalled ‘Wicked’ dolls, class action says

Ricketson argues parents and consumers expect products they buy to “coincide” with their age appropriateness labeling and the fact other manufacturers are able to sell similar products not containing links to adult websites is evidence doing so is “demonstrably avoidable.” 

“Because plaintiff was injured by the products and all consumers purchased the worthless products, which they purchased under the presumption that the products were appropriate, they have suffered losses,” the Mattel Wicked dolls class action says. 

Ricketson claims Mattel is guilty of unjust enrichment, negligence, breach of express warranty and breach of implied warranty of merchantability, and violating California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act, Unfair Competition Law and False Advertising Law. 

The plaintiff demands a jury trial and requests declaratory and injunctive relief and an award of compensatory, statutory and punitive damages for herself and all class members. 

Mattel revealed in its third-quarter earnings report last year that its sales exceeded expectations by increasing 13% during the period. The company attributed much of the sales increase to the success of the Barbie movie, which grossed more than $1.4 billion worldwide. 

Did you purchase a Wicked doll that came in a package containing an explicit link? Let us know in the comments.

The plaintiff is represented by Eric M. Poulin and Roy T. Willey, IV of Poulin | Willey | Anastopoulo, LLC. 

The Mattel class action lawsuit is Ricketson, et al. v. Mattel Inc., Case No. 2:24-cv-10389, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Red Toolbox won’t refund customers following lead-related toy recall, class action claims
• Fisher-Price class action claims infant swing linked to 5 deaths
• Build-A-Bear, Squishmallows copyright lawsuit moves forward
• Recall issued for children’s pajamas sold on Temu