A class action was filed against Procter & Gamble, alleging it fails to inform consumers that benzene is present in its aerosol antiperspirant products.
James Dethrow, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, filed a federal class-action complaint on Dec. 20 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois against The Procter & Gamble Company, alleging violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, unjust enrichment, breach of Implied Warranty and breach of Express Warranty.
According to the lawsuit, Procter & Gamble distributes, markets, and sells several over-the-counter aerosol antiperspirant products sold under the brand names “Old Spice” and “Secret.” Several of defendant’s Aerosol Antiperspirant Products sold under these brand names have been independently tested and shown to be adulterated with benzene, a known human carcinogen. The suit states that Procter & Gamble does not disclose on the labels that benzene is present, which violates state and federal laws.
Dethrow alleges the defendant knowingly sold its products without correct labeling despite containing dangerous carcinogens, and in doing so, broke laws and was fraudulent in its practices.
Dethrow seeks an order certifying himself and his counsel to represent the class, an order enjoining the defendant from selling the aerosol antiperspirant products, an order requiring Procter & Gamble to engage in a corrective advertising campaign and other affirmative injunctive relief, an order awarding declaratory relief and further retrospective or prospective injunctive relief, an order requiring the defendant to pay restitution or damages of all funds acquired by unlawful, unfair, or fraudulent business act or practice, an order requiring the defendant to disgorge any ill-gotten benefits received, an order for Defendant to pay appropriate damages for each count, statutory and actual damages, attorney’s fees and cost of suit. Dethrow is represented by Paul T. Geske of McGuire Law PC in Chicago.
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois case number 3:21-cv-01723-SMY
This article was first published in Madison Record.
