St. Ives Lotion Class Action Lawsuit Takes Issue With ‘Natural’ Claims

Two California residents claim St. Ives lotions are falsely advertised to create the impression that their ingredients are all natural.

Plaintiffs Michelle Robinson and Jessica Bercow claim that defendant Unilever United States Inc. has been misleading consumers as to the nature of the ingredients in some of the lotions it sells under the St. Ives brand.

According to the St. Ives class action lawsuit, these lotions are falsely labeled to give the impression they are made of all natural ingredients, when in fact they contain certain ingredients that no reasonable consumer would consider “natural.”

The products at issue are labeled with the phrase “Made with 100% Natural Moisturizers.” Other language on the labeling bolsters the idea of naturalness, with phrasing like “We Love Delicious Nature,” “Dermatologist tested” and “Instantly Boosts skin’s natural radiance,” the plaintiffs say.

Plaintiffs say some of the St. Ives products that bear this labeling contain dimethicone and phenoxyethanol. Both of those ingredients were the subject of an April 2016 enforcement action brought by the FTC against cosmetics manufacturers who allegedly branded their products as “natural” even though they contained those two ingredients.

As a result of that enforcement action, four companies agreed to stop marketing their products as “natural,” according to Robinson and Bercow.

Both Robinson and Mercow claim they were personally taken in by the defendant’s representations.

They say they purchased St. Ives lotions in reliance on the label’s statements that they are “Made with 100% Natural Moisturizers.” The plaintiffs say they construed those statements to mean that the products are truly natural and do not contain artificial ingredients. Had they known this impression was not true, they claim, they would not have purchased those products.

The plaintiffs list seven specific body lotions sold under the St. Ives brand that they say are subject to this allegedly false advertising:

• St. Ives Skin Reviewing Collagen Elastin Body Lotion
• St. Ives Soft & Silky Coconut & Orchid Body Lotion
• St. Ives Daily Hydrating Vitamin E & Avocado Body Lotion
• St. Ives Intense Healing Cranberry & Grapeseed Body Lotion
• St. Ives Refresh & Reverse Pear Nectar & Soy Body Lotion
• St. Ives Cucumber Water & Melon Body Lotion
• St. Ives Nourish & Soothe Oatmeal & Shea Butter Body Lotion.

Robinson and Bercow propose to represent a nationwide plaintiff Class that would cover all persons who since April 19, 2013 bought any of the St. Ives products at issue for their own personal use. They also propose a subclass consisting of Class Members who reside in California.

They are asking the court for injunctive relief as available under the California Legal Remedies Act. On their own behalves and that of the proposed Class, they also seek awards of compensatory and punitive damages, restitution, and reimbursement of court costs and attorneys’ fees, all with prejudgment interest.

The plaintiffs are represented by attorney Reuben D. Nathan of Nathan & Associates APC.

The St. Ives “Natural” Lotion Class Action Lawsuit is Michelle Robinson and Jessica Bercow v. Unilever United States Inc., Case No. 2:17-cv-03010, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.