Babyganics Bath Products
July 2018: This case was voluntarily dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled. because the parties reached a settlement agreement, the terms of which have not been disclosed.
September 2017: The case was stayed pending the resolution of settlement proceedings in a similar case, Mayhew v. Babyganics.
Summer 2017: A false advertising class-action lawsuit was filed against Babyganics in 2017. The complaint, which was originally filed in June and amended in July, alleges that the company misleadingly markets its bath products as “Tear Free” and gentle for infants and children when, according to the plaintiffs, scientific evidence shows that the products contain ingredients that are eye irritants. (Skeen et al v. KAS Direct, LLC d/b/a Babyganics, Case No. 17-cv-4119, S. D. NY.)
For more of TINA.org’s coverage of Babyganics, click here.
Class-Action Tracker
Babyganics Pre-Moistened Wipes
Babyganics SPF 50+ Sunscreens
The Latest
Phoebe Gates’s Startup Phia Was Just Accused of ‘Cookie Stuffing.’ Here’s What Happens Next
Esther Lian, Inc.com
Airport Retailers Can Now Charge an Employee Benefits Fee—but It May Not Go to Workers
Georgia Fearn, Inc.com
CATrends: False HEPA Claims
Lawsuits attempt to clear the air.
Olive Tree People
These “waterless” beauty products contain some surprising ingredients.
The Struggle is (Not) Real
Rags-to-riches stories on repeat.