Shaving products maker Harry's and pharmacy chain Rite Aid are among the latest companies targeted under lawsuits brought under California's Proposition 65, accusing Rite Aid of selling a shaving gel made by Harry's that allegedly contains a carcinogen.
According to the complaint in San Francisco Superior Court, Prop 65 "requires all businesses with 10 or more employees that operate within California or sell products therein to comply with Proposition 65 regulations."
Under Prop 65, businesses must include warning labels on any product that contains chemicals listed in Prop 65, the suit said. Companies face fines of up to $2,500 per day for each violation, up to $912,000, the suit said.
"This complaint is a representative action brought by Plaintiff in the public interest of the citizens of the State of California to enforce the People's right to be informed of the health hazards caused by exposure to diethanolamine (DEA), a toxic cheinical found in Harry's shave gels," the suit said.
The products are sold by Harry's Inc. and Rite Aid, according to the suit.
DEA "is a harmful chemical known to the State of California to cause cancer" since 2012, the complaint states.
Although the shaving gel is not meant for internal consumption, "some amount of exposure through ingestion can occur by touching the product with subsequent touching of the user's hand to mouth," the suit states. "No clear and reasonable warning is provided with the products regarding the health hazards of exposure to DEA."
The lawsuit seeks civil penalties against the two companies, "reasonable" attorney fees of $50,000 and an order requiring the warning labels.
Lawsuits under Prop 65 have been controversial for many years, with critics questioning who the real winners are in these claims. Critics assert the massive settlements under the law typically merely allow lawyers to get paid tens of millions of dollars, collectively, to file relatively easy lawsuits, which often assert no real harm. Annual reports from the California Attorney General's office in 2019, for instance, showed that of 1,000 notices of violations served, close to $30 million was paid to resolve claims either out of court or by consent, yet only $3.3 million went to the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment of the California EPA. Nearly $24 million went to attorney fees and costs in that same time.
The plaintiffs in the most recent action are represented by attorneys Evan J. Smith and Ryan P. Cardona, of the firm of Brosky Smith, of Beverly Hills.
.The plaintiff in this case, the Center for Environmental Health, has filed numerous Prop 65 lawsuits against many companies including Athleta LLC; The North Face Apparel Corp.; VF Corporation; VF Outdoor LLC; The Gap, Inc.; Victoria's Secret & Co.; Asics America Corporation; Nike, Inc.; Target Corporation; Target Brands, Inc.; Fila USA., Inc.; New Balance Athletics, Inc.; Mizuno USA, Inc. Mizuno USA, Inc.; Reebok International Ltd., LLC; Authentic Brands Group LLC.
Jonathan Bilyk contributed to this report.