Class Action Takes Issue With Five Pawns E-Cigarette Liquids

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.

On Nov. 11, a class action lawsuit was filed against Five Pawns, a maker of high-end liquids designed for e-cigarette users (also called “e-liquids”), alleging that Five Pawns misled consumers about the amounts of harmful chemicals in its e-cigarette liquids, and the dangers such chemicals pose.

“Despite Defendant’s marketing campaign that boasts its ‘top-notch ingredients’ that makes for a ‘high-end experience,’ Defendant’s products are actually laden with harmful chemicals,” the Five Pawns class action lawsuit declares.

Specifically, the e-liquid class action lawsuit points to the chemicals diacetyl (“DA”) and acetyl propionyl (“AP”). The complaint cites numerous studies that show the chemicals DA and AP are not toxic if eaten, but when inhaled may cause chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, emphysema, and “Bronchiolitis Obliterans, a condition in which irreversible scarring to the lungs is produced, in serious cases requiring lung transplants.”

The Five Pawns class action lawsuit alleges that Five Pawns deceptively advertised its e-cigarette liquids by not disclosing the levels of DA and AP on its bottles, inserts in its packaging, or the Five Pawns website. According to the complaint, Five Pawns knew about the levels of DA and AP in its products since September of 2014, but continued to market its liquids for e-cigarettes as being made from “natural ingredients” that are “sourced locally,” and using “solely diacetyl-free ingredients.”

The Five Pawns class action lawsuit cites to other testing done by Cloud9, an e-cigarette and vaporizer distributor in the United Kingdom. In the Cloud9 testing, Five Pawns products contained “the highest concentration [of AP] that has ever been seen in any e-liquid.” While Five Pawns disputes those results, Five Pawns own test results from 2014 showed that four of its products contain AP levels higher than acceptable levels set by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, the class action lawsuit states.

Plaintiffs Duane Robert Greene, Shawn Randall Thomas, and James Hirtzel all claim that they bought several 30 mL bottles of Five Pawns products, which typically sell for $27.50 each. The Five Pawns class action lawsuit alleges that Greene, Thomas, and Hirtzel would not have bought Five Pawns’ products had they properly disclosed the levels of DA and AP in them. The plaintiffs assert that Five Pawns “was able to charge more than what its e-liquids would have been worth had it disclosed the truth about them.”

The Five Pawns class action lawsuit asks to create a Class of “All persons, exclusive of Defendant and its employees, who purchased in the United States, one or more Five Pawns e-liquids sold by Defendant from November 2012 to the present.” The e-liquid lawsuit seeks to stop Five Pawns from marketing and selling its products without proper disclosure of the chemicals in them, and for damages for those who purchased Five Pawns e-liquids.

The plaintiffs are represented by Rachele R. Rickert, Betsy C. Manifold, Brittany N. Dejong, Janine L. Pollack, Michael Jaffe, and Gloria Kui Melwani of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP, and Jessica J. Sleater of Anderson & Sleater LLC.

The Five Pawns Class Action Lawsuit is Green, et al., v. Five Pawns Inc., Case No. 8:15-CV-01859, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Southern Division.