LOKIETZ v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON et al

On September 21, 2021, Marcy Lokietz (“Plaintiff”), on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, represented by Gary S. Graifman of Kantrowitz of Goldhamer & Graifman, PC, filed a personal property fraud lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson Consumer, Inc., Johnson & Johnson, and Neutrogena Corporation (collectively, “J&J” or “Defendants”), seeking injunctive reliefs and damages along with prejudgement interest, as well as other reliefs, for the alleged fraudulent concealment of the amount of Benzene in the product manufactured and sold by the Defendants. This case was filed in U.S. District Court in the District of New Jersey with Judge Freda L. Wolfson and Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni presiding.

In the complaint, the Plaintiff alleged that, “Defendants manufacture, sell, market, and distribute several over-the-counter Sunscreen Products under the brand name "Neutrogena." Several of Defendants' Neutrogena sunscreen products (identified above) have been independently tested and shown to be adulterated with Benzene, a known human carcinogen. The presence of Benzene in Defendants' Neutrogena Sunscreen Products was not disclosed in the products' label, in violation of state and federal law.”

The Plaintiff further alleged that, “Valisure tested numerous lots of Defendants' spray and lotion Sunscreen Products. Through its testing, Valisure discovered that certain of the Sunscreen Products contain Benzene, with values ranging from less than 0.1 parts per million ("ppm"), 0.10 ppm to 2 ppm, and more than 2 ppm. For reference, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health ("NIOSH") recommends protective equipment be worn by workers expecting to be exposed to Benzene at concentrations of 0.1 ppm and defines "skin absorption" as an exposure route.”

The Plaintiff also alleged that, “Benzene is classified as a human carcinogen, a substance that could potentially cause cancer depending on the level and extent of exposure” and “Defendants failed to properly warn consumers of the risks and dangers attendant to the use of Benzene in their sunscreen products – even well after Defendants knew or should have known of the Products’ hazards. Defendants continued to conceal the dangers of the Products until they issued a full recall of the Products.” The Plaintiff also alleged that, “Defendants knew, but failed to disclose to Plaintiff and the Class the danger of the Products.”

There are four claims of relief laid down by the Plaintiff, on behalf of herself and the class. The first claim alleged is for fraudulent concealment. The second claim is for the alleged violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (“FDUTPA”) Fla. Stat. §§ 501.201 et seq. The third claim is for the alleged violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act (“CFA”) N.J.S.A. § 56:8-1, et seq. The fourth claim is for alleged unjust enrichment. 

In its prayer for relief, the Plaintiff requested the Court for an order certifying this action as a Class Action and naming the Plaintiff as the representative of the Class. The Plaintiff further requested the Court for declaratory and injunctive reliefs along with compensatory, statutory and punitive damages; an order of restitution; all other forms of equitable monetary relief; and reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses and costs of suit.

This case summary may not reflect the current position of the parties to this litigation or the status of this case. Sign up to view the latest case updates and court documents.