Pirl

Pfizer ChapStick Misrepresentation Claim

False Advertising, Beauty & HealthStephanie Lair

You try to protect your lips with the best lip balm you can buy.

That appears to be a problem with Pfizer’s ChapStick Total Hydration 100%, which two individuals claim to be misrepresented on the open market to consumers.

Rachel Tyman (Broward County, Florida) and Johnathan Robinson (New York) both claim they were mislead, in class-action papers filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. Specifically, the plaintiffs are alleging negligent misrepresentation. Pfizer denies the claim.
Plaintiffs are seeking, through representation by The Richman Law Group (Brooklyn, NY) and Eggnatz, Lopatin & Pascucci LLP of Davie, Florida,Natalie Finkelman and James C. Shah of Shepard, Finkelman, Miller & Shah LLP of Media, Pennsylvania, and by Jayne A. Goldenstein of Pomerantz LLP in Weston, Florida, full restitution and disgorgement of ill-gotten gains, actual damages, attorney fees, court costs and pre- and post-judgement interest. They claim the ChapStick in NOT 100% natural as advertised, and does not provide healthier lips. Pfizer counters the ChapStick’s claims are scientifically sound.


Case Number: 1:16-cv-06941