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.
Multiple 5-Hour ENERGY Class Action Lawsuits Filed
By Mike Holter
UPDATE 6/10/13: The JPML consolidated the 5-Hour ENERGY Class Action Lawsuits into a California MDL.
The company behind 5-Hour ENERGY has been hit with a slew of class action lawsuits alleging it falsely advertised that the dietary supplement provides five hours of sustained energy without a “crash” later.
One of the 5-Hour ENERGY class action lawsuits, filed in Illinois by plaintiff Thomas Guarino, is seeking over $5 million in damages from defendant Innovation Ventures LLC (d/b/a Living Essentials). Two other complaints were filed in Missouri and Louisiana.
At issue in the class action lawsuits is the product statement “Hours of energy now – No crash later,” which Guarino says “is not true, as admitted on the Defendant’s website and hidden behind the bottles in the display, which reads: ‘No crash means no sugar crash.’”
“Reasonable consumers should not be expected to look beyond deceptive representation[s] made on the display and label to discover the truth about a product from an ingredient list set out in small print on the side of the package, or on the Defendant’s website,” Guarino says in his class action lawsuit.
Guarino further alleges that Living Essentials has knowledge of studies that show less expensive competing products perform the same as 5-Hour ENERGY and that 5-Hour ENERGY wears off just as quickly, if not quicker, than other energy product alternatives while delivering the same “crash” after effects.
As a result, consumers suffered economic damages by purchasing a product that didn’t word as advertised, he says, adding that they would not have paid more for 5-Hour ENERGY over cheaper alternatives if they knew the truth.
Guarino is seeking to represent all individuals or entities in the United States that purchased 5-hour ENERGY Shot products during the relevant time frame.
The case is Guarino v. Innovation Ventures LLC, d/b/a Living Essentials, Case No. 13-cv-00101-GPM-PMF, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois.
The other 5-Hour ENERGY Class Action Lawsuit cases are:
Forrest v. Innovation Ventures LLC, Case No. 13-cv-00172, U.S. District Court, Eastern District Missouri.
Waring, et al. v. Innovation Ventures LLC, Case No. 13-cv-00156, U.S. District Court, Eastern District Louisiana.
Updated June 10th, 2013
All class action and lawsuit news updates are listed in the Lawsuit News section of Top Class Actions
33 thoughts onMultiple 5-Hour ENERGY Class Action Lawsuits Filed
I felt sick also and had terrible gas. The worrst part was I was still soo tired! :( fart fart fart :( fart fart to all of,you
I bought many 5 hour energy drink and I notice it didnt last the 5 hous because my classes were 12-5 by than I was very tired
I dranked that crap 5 Hour Energy, when I worked the overnight shift. Sometimes I would work a 15hr. shift. That crap made me ill. I bought mine in a local pharmacy and very expensive. I won’t drink that crap anymore.
As an OTR driver I remember my first 5-hr energy drink and there was a hard crash afterwards. The crash was so hard that I was ill for most of that day. I learned I could drink the the stuff and get away without less pain if I was only sem-tired. And if I didn’t wanted to be ill not to go near this Energy Drink if I was dead tired because there would be a wicked big crash at the end. It would give me an ill yet lifeless feeling like the Flu of something. I just won’t use it if I can fine somethingelse. Whatever the reason the stuff never sat well with me.
Please include me in this.
i agree shame shame shame!!!!!!!!!!
Duh.. you pound caffeine in shot form daily and you are surprised it might make you unhealthy? I pound vodka in my tomato juice every morning for my boost and I know my liver will fall out of my ass one day. So get real people. Stop making the lawyers rich with this bullshit.
i drunk the stuff all the time you never no what you think is good for you are actually bad
Um, the front of their bottles and the homepage of their website clearly says, “No sugar crash”. Every ad I’ve ever seen for this product clearly says “No crash means no sugar crash.” That sounds like adequate disclosure in my opinion. Besides, if the print was allegedly too small for all disclosures that are allegedly required, they’d need to put the 1.93oz of product into a 55 gallon barrel. They even go beyond FDA requirements by not rounding the caloric content (they could truthfully allege 0 calories for the purpose of complying with federal labeling laws, but they clearly disclose 4 calories).
Defendants also allege that customers kept buying more of the product because it was allegedly defective. That’s like trading a flux capacitor for a Libyan nuclear bomb, then continuing to do more such trades with the same mad scientist.
This suit seems as bad as the morons that kept drenching sprayable butter onto vegetables. “There are 0 calories in this 0.25g serving of solidified milk fat, and 100 x 0 = 0. Why am I gaining weight?”
These frivolous suits bring us one step closer to full communism.
wooo-hooo glad this product is in class status….yippie now no- doz need to be in class status also……. these companies lying to the consumer just to get richer……shame shame shame!!!!! :-(!