Nutraceutical Homeopathic Supplement Class Action Claims Trimmed

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.

In a partial win for supplement maker Nutraceutical Corp., a California federal judge tossed two of nine claims in a proposed class action lawsuit alleging the company falsely advertises its homeopathic supplements.

Plaintiffs Cynthia Hammock, Sherry Bentley, and Linda Love filed the proposed class action lawsuit against Nutraceutical Corp., NutraMarks Inc., and NutraPure Inc. in Sept. 2015, for allegedly deceptively labeling its NatraBio® homeopathic supplements – including Smoking Withdrawal, Leg Cramps, Restless Legs, Cold and Sinus Nasal Spray, Allergy and Sinus, Children’s Cold and Flu, and Flu Relief Spray.

The plaintiffs allege these seven supplements were falsely advertised as providing relief from various ailments including colds, flus, allergies, pain, tobacco cravings, and leg cramps when the supplements actually do not work as advertised and are nothing more than “sugar pills.”

In addition, the complaint asserts that Nutraceutical and its two subsidiaries market products as “Natural Homeopathic Medicine” made from “all natural” ingredients when several of the supplements actually contain artificial and synthetic ingredients.

But Nutraceutical motioned to dismiss the entire lawsuit consisting of three proposed Classes, arguing that the plaintiffs’ allegations of false advertising are based on informal internet articles irrelevant to the purported ineffective supplements and that the back of the supplement labels discloses a number of ingredients.

The companies also argued to dismiss claims for injunctive relief.

Chief U.S. District Judge Barry Ted Moskowitz partially agreed and tossed plaintiffs’ request for injunctive relief, siding with Nutraceutical that the plaintiffs lack standing because they have not demonstrated that they are in danger of purchasing the NatraBio® products in the future.

“Instead the Plaintiffs allege that the Products are ineffective. Because Plaintiffs believe the Products are ineffective, the Plaintiffs would not purchase them again and suffer injury,” the judge noted.

Judge Moskowitz also granted Nutraceutical’s motion to dismiss claims for breach of implied warranty under both California and Florida law, stating that because products were not directly purchased from Nutraceutical, privity had not been established.

However, the Judge upheld plaintiffs’ claims that Nutraceutical made false and deceptive misrepresentations regarding the “all natural” ingredients and effectiveness of their products, stating that the labeling on the front packaging can “conceivably deceive a reasonable consumer into believing the Products contain only natural ingredients.”

Furthermore, Judge Moskowitz allowed the plaintiffs’ request for punitive damages, ruling that the general allegations that Nutraceutical knew their product could not “live up to the promised advertising” yet continued to market the supplements were sufficient.

In his decision, Judge Moskowitz also denied Nutraceutical’s motion to dismiss claims for breach of express warranty under Florida law, holding that “when an express warranty is contained on packaging directed at the end-purchaser, privity is not required.”

The consumers are represented by Ronald Marron, Skye Resendes and William B. Richards Jr. of the Law Offices of Ronald A. Marron.

The Nutraceutical Homeopathic Supplement Class Action Lawsuit is Cynthia Hammock, et al. v. Nutramarks Inc., et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-02056, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.