Consumer Product Lawsuits and Safety

Stanley tumblers have taken the world by storm in recent months. The cups drew a lot of public attention and interest after becoming an internet phenomenon, and then quickly came under scrutiny for containing lead. 

Now, the manufacturer of the popular cups, Pacific Market International (PMI), is being sued by four California women in a class action suit for allegedly deceiving consumers about the presence of lead in the tumblers. 

“PMI had a duty to disclose its use of lead before enticing millions of customers to unwittingly buy its drinkware,” the suit states. “Instead of allowing customers to decide for themselves and their families whether to accept any risks associated with using a lead-contaminated drinking cup, PMI kept customers in the dark so as not to interfere with its bonanza of influencer-driven sales, especially to young women.” 

Is there lead in Stanley cups?

The short answer: yes. But it’s more complex than that. 

To keep drinks cold, Stanley tumblers use stainless steel. At the bottom of each cup, there is a small pellet that contains lead, which is the stainless steel vacuum seal insulation.

Should that seal come off, consumers would have direct exposure to the lead pellet while drinking from their Stanley cups. However, according to comments from the company, the likelihood of that happening is very slim. 

“Our manufacturing process currently employs the use of an industry standard pellet to seal the vacuum insulation at the base of our products; the sealing material includes some lead,” the company explains on its website. “Once sealed, this area is covered with a durable stainless steel layer, making it inaccessible to consumers.” 

The company also explained that all cups and tumblers are eligible for a lifetime warranty should any of the seals break. 

What are the details of the lawsuit? 

Though PMI has been forthcoming in its use of lead in the manufacturing process of its Stanley cups, the lawsuit alleges that this hadn’t come out until recently. Meanwhile, the cups had generated a great deal of internet buzz prior to that. 

“PMI has marketed its products to the public for years as a safe, practical item especially suitable for young women,” the suit states. “But PMI did not disclose its use of lead in manufacturing until January 2024. Rather, it advertises its cups as being ‘BPA-free’ and made of stainless steel, while omitting another key ingredient used in its vacuum seal: lead.” 

The suit also states that all four women bought the cups, containing lead, with no disclosures or warnings about the lead, and they wouldn’t have bought the cups – or spent as much as they did on a cup – had they known they contained lead. 

The plaintiffs are requesting that Stanley discloses the use of lead or any other toxins in its products, as well as several undisclosed damages. 

If you use recycling bags – especially Hefty or Great Value (Walmart) brand recycling bags – you could qualify for as much as a $50 settlement payment.

As a result of a class action settlement, Reynolds Consumer Products, the bag manufacturer, agreed to pay $3 million to settle claims that it wrongfully marketed its trash bags as “recycling” bags despite their inability to actually be recycled at numerous solid waste disposal facilities.

Reynolds disputed the allegations and the court has not made any determination about who is right, but Reynolds apparently felt it was better to fork over the $3 million and be done with this once and for all.

Proof of purchase? $50! No proof? $12

The settlement benefits consumers who purchased Hefty and/or Great Value brand recycling bags between July 20, 2018, and Aug. 30, 2023.

Under the provisions of the settlement, anyone who filed to be a class member can receive $2 per purchased product. With proof of purchase, consumers can claim up to 25 products, for a $50 maximum payment. But get this -- even those without proof of purchase, win too. They can claim up to six products, for a maximum payment of $12.

A full list of the Hefty and Great Value brand Recycling bags included in the Settlement can be found here.

All that’s required to receive a settlement check is to file a request either online or via mail by no later than December 13, 2023. You can find those details here and answers to any questions about the lawsuit and claim process here.

If you’re a parent who has purchased school uniform pieces from The Children’s Place, you may want to get rid of them sooner than later.

A new class action lawsuit, filed by Angala Garland, found that the clothing store was selling and marketing these items to parents, though they contained dangerous chemicals – per- and polyfluorinated alkyl substances (PFAS), or “forever chemicals.” 

PFAS got the name “forever chemicals” because they never degrade in the environment – they contaminate drinking water, soil, air, food, and just about everything. This exposure becomes problematic for consumers’ health – especially young kids. 

A lower price could come with health risks

Garland brought the case to Bradley/Gombacher LLP after purchasing the uniform for her child at The Children’s Place. The pieces are available in-store, online, and on the company’s Amazon storefront. 

In 2022, she purchased: two multi-packs of boys uniform polos, one multi-pack of boys uniform long-sleeve polos, two multi-packs of boys pull-on chino uniform cargo pants, one multi-pack of boys boys uniform chino shorts, a boys uniform stretch chino pant, a boys uniform zip-up mock neck sweater, two multi-packs of boys uniform active fleece joggers and two boys uniform zip-up hoodies. 

Garland went with The Children’s Place because they were offering uniform pieces at a good price. She read through all of the tags and labeling, read through the company’s website, and never saw any disclosures related to PFAS or other dangerous chemicals.

After her four-year-old child wore the uniforms through the 2022-2023 school year, she had the items tested at a third-party lab to confirm the presence of PFAS. Ultimately, the results showed that the clothes contained some amount of the chemicals. 

Now, Garland is seeking restitution from The Children’s Place for herself, as well as any other parents across the country who have purchased these items. 

Kids are at a higher risk 

According to the official complaint, children wear these uniforms five days a week for 40 hours a week. The complaint says this is consistent exposure to these chemicals that come with a number of related health risks. 

“The young children who wear [these] school uniforms are uniquely vulnerable and susceptible to the adverse health incomes associated with PFAS due to their low body weight, sensitive development, prolonged periods of wear during the school week, and direct oral exposure due to frequent hand-to-mouth behaviors,” the complaint reads. “The levels of PFAS in the school uniforms pose a greater body burden and higher health dangers to children than to adults exposed to the same levels of PFAS.” 

The lawsuit alleges that The Children’s Place was aware of the presence of chemicals in the uniforms, and hasn’t stopped selling them or made any changes. 

Long-term dangers from PFAS

PFAS are found in everything from fast food packaging, water- and stain-resistant children’s products, and many personal care products.

PFAS have been found to significantly affect consumers’ hormone levels, which can have an effect on women’s reproductive health or developmental concerns in children. Long-term, there is also a higher risk of obesity, high cholesterol, cancer, and a compromised immune system.

Some video game players stand to benefit from a class action lawsuit settlement. DoubleDown Interactive has agreed to pay $415 million to end litigation that accused the company of violating Washington’s gambling laws.

According to Top Class Actions, the settlement benefits consumers who played DoubleDown Casino, DoubleDown Fort Knox, DoubleDown Classic and or Ellen’s Road to Riches before Nov. 14, 2022.

The plaintiffs sued because the games require the use of in-game “chips.” The chips are free when consumers download the game but the plaintiffs claimed in their suit that they were forced to buy additional chips using actual cash.

“Defendants’ online casino games have thrived and thousands of consumers have spent millions of dollars unwittingly playing Defendants’ unlawful games of chance,” the suit claims.

After the lawyers and court costs are paid, consumers who participate in the class will divide what’s left of the $415 million. There’s a special webpage, found here, where participants can estimate what they will receive.

XTEND powder drinks

Woodbolt has settled a lawsuit by agreeing to pay $3 million to end litigation that accused it of falsely advertising its XTEND workout powder as having zero calories. The settlement will benefit people who paid for some XTEND workout powder products between July 28, 2014, and Jan. 24, 2023. 

Seventy-five products are covered by the settlement. You can find the complete list here. Under the settlement, consumers who are included in the class can receive 50 cents for every package of the product they purchased. Proof of purchase is not required.

Affected consumers who believe they are eligible for compensation must make a claim to join the settlement by April 24. Consumers can file a claim here.

Hospital data breach

Rehoboth McKinley Christian Health Care Services has agreed to pay an undisclosed amount of money to resolve a lawsuit stemming from its 2021 data breach. The company has not admitted to any wrongdoing.

The settlement covers people who were informed of a data breach at the facility around May 2021. The breach was discovered in February of that year.

The suit alleged that the breach revealed names, addresses, contact information, Social Security numbers, driver’s license, passport numbers, health insurance data and financial account information.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs say members of the class can receive up to $500 for what are called “ordinary” data breach losses. They include bank fees, communication expenses, credit-related costs and up to four hours of lost time at a rate of $15 per hour. 

The deadline for filing is April 10. You can file it here.