Class Action

Speed Stick Stain Guard Antiperspirants

Class Action

Speed Stick Stain Guard Antiperspirants

October 2019: This case was transferred from state court to federal court. (Case No. 19-cv-2710, E.D. Mo.)

July 2019: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Colgate-Palmolive for allegedly falsely marketing Speed Stick Stain Guard Antiperspirants as fighting yellow stains and white marks while providing odor and wetness protection when, according to plaintiffs, the active ingredient (aluminum zirconium tetrachlorohydrex GLY) actually causes white marks and yellow stains and the antiperspirant is less-effective than other products because the active ingredient is diluted. (Huskey et al v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., Case No. 19SL-CC02729, Missouri State Court – St. Louis)

For more of TINA.org’s coverage of the marketing of deodorants, click here.


Legal Action

Colgate-Palmolive

Colgate-Palmolive

TINA.org found Colgate-Palmolive deceptively marketing its Colgate and Tom’s of Maine toothpaste tubes as “recyclable” despite not being recycled in reality.


Class-Action Tracker

Colgate Toothpastes

Class Action

Colgate Toothpastes

Allegations: Failing to disclose that products contain, or are at risk of containing, toxic heavy metals, including lead and mercury

Hello Kids Fluoride Rinses

Class Action

Hello Kids Fluoride Rinses

Allegations: Deceptively marketing candy- and fruit-flavored mouth rinses as safe for children when fluoride mouth rinses are not safe for children younger than 6 years old

Fabuloso Cleaning Products

Class Action

Fabuloso Cleaning Products

Allegations: Failing to disclose that products contain a bacteria and may increase the risk of contracting invasive infections

Speed Stick Stain Guard

Class Action

Speed Stick Stain Guard

Allegations: Falsely advertising that antiperspirants fight yellow stains and white marks when the active ingredient causes both


The Latest

Filters


Show More