Pet owners win class cert. in Nutramax Cosequin supplement class action

Nutramax Cosequin class action lawsuit overview: 

• Who: A class of pet owners have had their class certification upheld for a class action lawsuit filed against Nutramax Laboratories Inc. and Nutramax Laboratories Veterinary Sciences Inc. 
• Why: The class action lawsuit claims Nutramax falsely markets that its Cosequin pet health supplement products promote healthy joints and mobility in dogs. 
• Where: The class action lawsuit is in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 

The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld certification for a class of pet owners in a Nutramax class action claiming the health supplement company falsely marketed its pet health supplement product Cosequin. 

The class action lawsuit argues Nutramax falsely markets that its Cosequin health supplement products — which contain glucosamine and chondroitin, among other things — promote healthy joints and mobility in dogs. 

The three-judge Ninth Circuit panel affirmed a district judge’s decision to grant class certification to the pet owners, determining the class “may rely on an unexecuted damages model to show that damages are susceptible to common proof.” 

In May 2022, that district judge certified a class of California residents who purchased Cosequin DS Maximum Strength Chewable Tablets, Cosequin DS Maximum Strength Plus MSM Chewable Tablets and Cosequin DS Maximum Strength Plus MSM Soft Chews. 

Nutramax challenged district court’s reliance on damages model put forth by plaintiffs’ expert

Nutramax had challenged the district court’s reliance on a proposed damages model created by the plaintiffs’ expert to find that common questions predominated as to injury, according to an opinion filed by the Ninth Circuit on April 22. 

“The panel held that, contrary to Nutramax’s contention, there was no general requirement that an expert actually apply to the proposed class an otherwise reliable damages model in order to demonstrate that damages are susceptible to common proof at the class certification stage,” the Ninth Circuit wrote regarding the Nutramax class action. 

The Nutramax Cosequin class action lawsuit is not the first to target Nutramax over claims involving glucosamine. A federal panel centralized three class action lawsuits back in December 2013 that claimed the company falsely advertised the benefits of a pair of its joint health supplements. 

That same year, a federal judge in California declined to toss a class action lawsuit claiming Rite Aid Corp. and Wal-Mart Stores Inc. misled consumers about the effectiveness of Cosamin brand  joint health supplements manufactured by Nutramax. 

Have you purchased a Nutramax Cosequin pet health supplement? Let us know in the comments.

The pet owners are represented by Mark Sigmon, Greg Coleman and Adam A. Edwards of Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips Grossman PLLC, Michael H. Pearson and Daniel L. Warshaw of Pearson Simon & Warshaw LLP and Matt Schultz of Levin Papantonio Rafferty Proctor Buchanan O’Brien Barr & Mougey PA. 

The Nutramax Cosequin class action lawsuit is Lytle, et al. v. Nutramax Laboratories Inc., et al., Case No. 22-55744, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. 

Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

• Pup-Peroni class action claims product falsely advertised as containing real beef
• Mid-America Pet Food class action claims products contaminated with salmonella
• Judge gives initial approval to $15M Seresto settlement
• Potential bacterial and chemical contamination leads to nationwide pet food recalls, class actions