Tag: loreal

Why Beauty Lawsuits Are Set to Increase (Part One)

~ Joseph Kellner

Beauty companies seem to be coming under increasing fire with lawsuits, fueled in part by the rise of Tik-Tok and other social media platforms, and legal experts are expecting the number of cases to surge. For a quick recap of the current ones garnering the most attention.

In a suit against Olaplex, several plaintiffs have claimed they have sustained personal injuries to their hair and scalp including hair loss and damaged hair, something chief executive officer JuE Wong has vehemently denied on social media. There’s also a case against L’Oreal, in which Missouri resident Jennifer Mitchell filed a lawsuit against the beauty giant and a slew of other companies, claiming that her uterine cancer was “directly and approximately” caused by her regular and prolonged exposure to phthalates and other endocrine-disrupting chemicals found in their hair care products. Recently, it was consolidated into a new class action multi-district litigation (MDL).

Then there’s the suit against Sephora where Lindsey Finster alleged that a significant percentage of products with the “Clean At Sephora” tag contain ingredients inconsistent with how consumers understand this term. In particular, it claimed that Saie Mascara 101 contains numerous synthetic ingredients, several of which have been reported to cause possible harm.

“If you Google the Olaplex case, that says it kind of started from Tik-Tok. As an attorney, it is crazy to think that trends in litigation are going to come from social media outlets,” said Marissa Alkhazov, a shareholder in Buchalter law firm’s Seattle office and the Northwest chair of the firm’s products liability practice group. “But the fact of the matter is that information is spread so widely now, and there’s this huge audience and our society is more litigious.”

Kelly A. Bonner, an associate at law firm Duane Morris, added that a growing interest and concern by consumers about what’s in their products and the mainstreaming of clean beauty products, which has become a very big business, along with competing ideas about what constitutes clean, are other driving factors, compounded by media coverage.

“You have a 24/7 global media landscape that amplifies those concerns and you add to that a very active and increasingly organized plaintiffs’ bar and what you’re going to see are a lot more cases, a lot more attention and a lot more media coverage,” she said.

While beauty suits are nothing new with a class action suit brought against Los Angeles hair stylist Chaz Dean’s brand Wen in 2016 among past cases, John Gardella, a shareholder at CMBG3 Law, believes that a focus on ESG practices also means there is likely to be an uptick in suits similar to the one against Sephora that is currently playing out in court. (The L’Oreal and Olaplex cases are considered product liability suits, while Sephora is involved in a consumer fraud litigation.)

“There’s a big push in the U.S. on that particular topic and it’s caught the attention of many plaintiffs’ attorneys in terms of how various industries are marketing their products and whether or not they are truly as they say,” he said.

“I think almost every company markets their products in some way being safe to use, environmentally friendly, clean, things like that,” he continued. “The nature of the beauty industry at the moment is such that there are many synthetic products or components in those products. So the plaintiffs’ attorneys have certainly taken a closer look at exactly what’s being said as compared to what is in those products and that’s driving a lot of lawsuits that we’re seeing.”

L’Oreal heiress Liliane Bettencourt dies at age 94

~ Joseph Kellner

PARIS – Liliane Bettencourt, the L’Oreal cosmetics heiress and the world’s richest woman, has died at her home in a chic Parisian suburb. She was 94.

Bettencourt’s daughter, Francoise Bettencourt Meyers, said in a written statement Thursday that her mother “left peacefully” overnight in Neuilly-sur-Seine.

Liliane Bettencourt was the only child of Eugene Schueller, who founded L’Oreal in the early 20th century. Forbes magazine estimated her fortune to be worth $39.5 billion this year.

L’Oreal Chairman and CEO Jean-Paul Agon expressed “great admiration” for Bettencourt. Agon said she “always looked” after the company and its employees and “she has personally contributed greatly to its success for many years.”

Born in 1922 in Paris, she married French politician Andre Bettencourt at the age of 27. Her husband notably served as a minister at the end of the 1960s and beginning of the 1970s. He died in 2007.

Liliane Bettencourt inherited the L’Oreal fortune upon the death of her father in 1957. When the company went public six years later, she continued to own a majority stake

 

As the world’s leading beauty company, L’Oreal generated sales amounting to 25.8 billion euros in 2016 and employs 89,300 people worldwide, according to the company.

Bettencourt’s name has been involved in a politico-financial scandal known in France as the “Bettencourt Affair”, which has wound its way through French courts and newspapers for years.

The case stemmed from a 2007 complaint filed by Bettencourt’s daughter accusing one of her mother’s closest friends, the photographer Francois-Marie Banier, of manipulating the elderly widow into giving him artwork and cash.

In 2015, a French court handed Banier a three-year prison sentence on charges of swindling millions of euros from Bettencourt by taking advantage of her weak mental state. The court acquitted a former ally of former President Nicolas Sarkozy in the case.

Sarkozy’s former campaign treasurer, Eric Woerth, was acquitted on charges of “abuse of weakness” and taking donations from Bettencourt during the 2007 presidential election campaign.

Sarkozy himself was cleared in 2013 of preliminary charges.

Bettencourt is survived by her daughter, Francoise, who was born in 1953.

LOreal Misleading Again!

~ Joseph Kellner

The Real Hair TruthSo Many hairdressers in my industry use LOreal hair color and there products. And so many don’t take the time to really find out that they are in competition with there manufacturer. Who will pledge allegiance too you and will send the “Best Snake Oil Salesman”, too you to inform you on the usage of there color and products that you can buy on the internet. You don’t really understand the how good these company’s are doing you wrong and also to the beauty industry.

Here is a good tidbit to chew on and to really think about how these company’s work behind the scenes to squeeze out every nickel and dime from there products. Advertising can be very misleading to the professional and to the consumer.  Go ahead and click on the link first for the complaint and read about the case filed in court.

November 2013: A federal judge denied final approval of a class-action lawsuit against L’Oréal USA, Inc. The complaint, originally filed in April 2013, alleged that the company misleadingly markets professional hair care products as only available for purchase in salons when the products are actually available for purchase in major retail outlets. According to the settlement terms, the company agreed to remove the misleading labels from the product packages for a period of five years. The Court rejected the settlement because (1) the salon-only purchasers and the retail outlet purchasers had different interests and so the class certification, a requirement for settlement, was inappropriate; and (2) the settlement was not fair, reasonable, and adequate because the company only agreed to stop the misleading labeling for a limited time and the class received no monetary award. (Richardson et al v. L’Oreal, Case No. 13-cv-00508, District of D. C.).

Misleading Information

 You the professional LEGALLY HAS the full liability of the products you use in the salon. You purchase them, you bought them, there yours. Once a product is purchased you have hold full liability. Take the time to know your salon products, color line, hair care line.  Know everything about the distributor, and also the manufacturer.  And of course in my Beauty Industry there are organizations such as the (PBA.com – Who says they are the legal eagle of the industry). (Behind The Chair – This is the Sears & Roebucks of the Beauty Industry), (Hair brained.com – Which basically is what it says it is Hair brained), (Salon Galaxy.com – Which is a copy cat of all the others mentioned). These sites could take the time to influence and to teach there subscribers but have taken the course of self advertising and stimulating there own agenda. So sad! there will come a day when the whole industry is controlled by one or two manufacturers and then don’t say I did not warn you!  Wake up sheeple!

Salon only products!

Don’t be hood winked.!!!!!!!

Joseph Kellner

THE SMARTPHONE OF HAIRCOLOR IS HERE….COURTESY OF B’ORÉAL OF PARIS.

~ Joseph Kellner

THE REAL HAIR TRUTH.COM

I often wonder why salon owners and booth renters will buy from B’Oreal, WHY? But as soon as I think about it hairdressers are not left brain and right brained at the same time. Business is not taught in beauty schools. And if there is a business class in the hair shows it is to dump on one brand and try to sell you there’s.

So who do you want to partner with, the company that teaches consumers that they can do your job & discredits you or the ones that support the professional hairdresser? And the professional(?) Hairdresser will buy from companies such as Boreal, Paul Mitchell, Redken, TIGI, etc. knowing they do not have a EXCLUSIVE with the company. Because they are in competition with the manufacturer. The manufacturer will make a cosmetic line for the consumer and also for the professional(?). Trust me in other professions a true professional would not do this stupid mistake.
THE SMARTPHONE OF HAIRCOLOR IS HERE….COURTESY OF B’ORÉAL of PARIS.
L’Oreal Paris Mousse Absolue
At-home hair dye always seems like a fine idea until you find yourself trying to mix several different foul-smelling chemicals in the right ratio while unfolding a manual the size of a roadmap for planet Earth. But, though it may be less than ideal, for many women, an expensive hours-long trip to the salon isn’t an option anymore.
It’s something that’s been in the works for over a decade, according to Luc Maelstaf, packaging designer for B’Oreal of Paris. “Everybody always dreams of a product where you push a button and a machine does the work for you,” he says. “This device does just that: It makes the hair color mix without the consumer even noticing that it’s happening.”

Maelstaf says that B’Oreal of Paris used Japanese technology to develop the packaging of the product, which is what makes the automatic, reusable qualities possible. Two separate aerosol cans are held together in a sleek plastic sleeve. One can contains the colorant; the other, the oxidant. “The reaction to create hair color only happens when you have a mix of those two things,” says Sophie Bodelin, the head of hair color labs for the France headquarters of B’Oréal of Paris. “But now you don’t have to mix it yourself. The mix is complete as soon as the product comes out of the bottle.”

But in my industry they will buy the products from Boreal and use them in there salon. And what you have to listen to now is when the customer asks you what are you using on there hair. They will ask you. And then go home and find it on the internet. Thank you internet you gave the manufacturers a ndew3 way to sell there products. And that goes like wise for the entrepreneur. A entrepreneur will have a lot of hard times in the beauty industry. Manufacturing a beauty product is not easy and it takes money from start to finish to packing. What’s left for the beauty industry entrepreneur. The internet. Cosmetics company’s have never dreamed there sales would sky rocket like they have since the birth of the internet.
So for the Entrepreneur. 
 IT’S SIMPLE AND THEY HAVE SEEN THE MAJOR MANUFACTURERS DO IT SO THEY ARE ALREADY SCHOOLED on the vast uses of the internet. And also IN THE KNOWLEDGE OF NO VALUE AND NO EXCLUSIVE FOR THERE FELLOWS IN THE INDUSTRY. That would be too much to ask for especially in day and age when EX-Monsanto employee’s run the FDA.  Why go door to door anymore to sell your product. Don’t put a face on it, don’t take any responsibility for it. When you can just plant your packaged (Soap) on the internet. And dear Lord don’t get to know your customers, because they will soon find out your product is just a private label just like the many entrepreneurs have in the beauty industry. I have a gentleman in my next film “The Beautiful Lies” who sells hair color. Since I have used his hair color I get nothing but calls from the company wanting to tell me of there newest and latest and greatest product. That I should try and mind you buy also. They never heard of having samples to give to there good clients. And if a company in my so called professional beauty industry wants to tell you the horrors of a major manufacturer it is for there goodness. They just want you to buy there shit.
LOSERS!

 

Real Hair Truth Cosmetic/Beauty Product Injury Lawsuits

~ Joseph Kellner

the real hair truth

Injuries from cosmetic products can come in a wide variety of forms — from allergic reactions to infections and other complications. There are two main legal theories that a person injured by a cosmetic product (the plaintiff) could sue under: product liability and breach of warranty. This article discusses what a plaintiff in a cosmetic injury suit must prove under either theory, cases specifically related to allergic reactions, and the possibility of class action lawsuits.

Product Liability: The Basics

The most likely theory to be used in a lawsuit involving cosmetic product injuries is product liability. An injured plaintiff can sue both the manufacturer and/or the seller (the defendant) of the cosmetic product if his or her injury was caused by a defect, a defective design or improper labeling. Most states follow what is called the “strict product liability” rule, although a few still use traditional negligence rules.

A plaintiff suing under a strict liability theory simply needs to prove:

  • that he or she was the kind of consumer that the defendant intended to use the product
  • that the defect did not occur after the product was sold, and
  • that the plaintiff was injured.

This kind of theory is called “strict liability” because many of the requirements in a standard negligence case, like proof of a specific duty of care owed to the plaintiff, are not included. Most states adopted strict liability for mass-marketed consumer products because, among other things, the manufacturers needed to be financially responsible for their products, and not be allowed to escape liability simply because of the difficulty plaintiffs faced trying to prove negligence claims.

In a negligence case (in those few states that still use this theory for consumer products), the plaintiff will need to prove:

  • that he or she bought the product from the defendant
  • that the defendant should have known that the product could be dangerous if unaccompanied by proper warnings, or that the product had a defect
  • that the failure to warn the plaintiff, or the defect or defective design, injured the plaintiff, and
  • that the plaintiff didn’t do anything to cause the injury.

Breach of Warranty

A cosmetic product injury case based on a breach of warranty theory will be the same as other standard breach of warranty cases.

An injured plaintiff could sue for breach of an express warranty if the seller or manufacturer made specific guarantees that a product would have specific effects that the product did not have (note that this theory might not fit with most cases involving an actual injury).

The plaintiff could also sue for breach of an implied warranty that the cosmetic product was fit for normal use, i.e. the implied guarantee that no normal cosmetic product would cause an injury if used properly.

Finally, the plaintiff could sue for breach of an implied warranty that the product was fit for a specific purpose, i.e. that the defendant knew the plaintiff wanted to use the product for a specific purpose, but the product caused an injury when the plaintiff tried use it.

There are many state and federal laws controlling breach of warranty claims. Some breach of warranty claims may not be appropriate when the plaintiff is suing for physical injuries, if the law only allows compensation for the money lost on the product (what is called “economic damages”).

Some warranty laws, however, do allow a plaintiff to sue for physical injuries. Perhaps more importantly, proving a breach of warranty can help prove a strict liability or negligence claim. A plaintiff is not limited to suing under one theory, so including a breach of warranty claim in a cosmetic injury lawsuit will generally help a plaintiff’s case overall.

Injuries Caused by Allergies

If a manufacturer knows, or should know, that a product might cause an allergic reaction in some people, injured plaintiffs could potentially sue the manufacturer for failing to warn about the allergic reaction under a strict liability or negligence theory. A breach of warranty theory might also be possible if the allergic reaction is not extremely rare, i.e. the product was not fit for cosmetic use because some percentage of the population was allergic.

Class Actions for Cosmetic Product Injuries

If a cosmetic product causes many or all of its users the same kind of injury, then a class action may be possible. In a class action case, multiple plaintiffs with the same kind of injury from the same source sue the defendant in one lawsuit.

If someone is injured by a cosmetic product, they or their attorney should research whether there is already a class action case or a settlement fund for people injured by the product. Often, even though the case has settled, there will be a fund to pay those who were not a part of the original case.