Maybelline SuperStay Makeup

July 2014: The parties agreed to dismiss this lawsuit. It was dismissed with prejudice as to the plaintiffs and without prejudice as to the class members. The reasons for the dismissal have not been disclosed.

May 2014: A federal judge refused to certify the class in a lawsuit against Maybelline for allegedly misleadingly marketing its makeup. The complaint, which was originally filed in 2012, alleges, among other things, that the company promises its makeup – including SuperStay 24HR Lipcolor and SuperStay 24HR Makeup – will not transfer (i. e. rub off) and will last for 24 hours when, in reality, such claims are not true. The judge found that, among other things, the named plaintiff and the other class members did not suffer a similar injury because, based on the results of surveys, the named plaintiff’s conduct (i. e. relying on the misrepresentations) was not typical of the other class members. (Algarin et al v. Maybelline, LLC and Maybelline New York, Case No. 12-cv-03000, S. D. CA.).

For more information about other class-action lawsuits against Maybelline and TINA.org’s coverage of the company, click here.

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled.

When a complaint is dismissed without prejudice, an amended version of the complaint can be refiled.

Tags:



Leave a Reply

Back to Top ↑
  • Search Class-Action Tracker



  • Recent Class Actions

  • The Class-Action Tracker is intended to notify consumers about false advertising class-action lawsuits filed around the country, but does not necessarily reflect TINA.org’s opinion with respect to the lawsuits or disposition of the cases

  • Sign Up for E-mail Updates