Contact A Lawyer
Have A Potential Case Reviewed By An Attorney
A federal judge has dismissed a class action lawsuit over “Just for Men” hair dye, which sought medical monitoring for men who had not yet suffered allergic reactions or hypersensitivity problems with the beard and hair dying kits.
The class action lawsuit was originally filed by Bryan Belton and Randall Collins, whose claim indicated that Combe International’s “Just For Men” beard dye placed them at risk of developing allergic reactions to the chemical p-Phenylenediamine (PPD). The claim differed from other “Just For Men” lawsuits filed by men nationwide, who claimed to have suffered severe and painful allergic reactions.
“Just For Men” is a popular hair and beard dye marketed for removal of grey hair among men. However, concerns have emerged over the past year about a growing number of reports involving allergic reactionproblems with “Just for Men”, indicating that the hair and beard dyes have caused burns, scarring, anaphylactic shock, skin depigmentation and other injuries.
The class action lawsuit for “Just for Men” users called for Combe to pay for medical monitoring, even if men did not yet have an allergic reaction. The complaint claimed that exposure to “Just For Men” places men at an increased risk of experiencing hypersensitivity reactions later in life.
In a memorandum and order (PDF) issued on November 14, U.S. District Judge Catherine Perry, of the Eastern District of Missouri, rejected the claims and dismissed the complaint, ruling that medical monitoring is not an independent cause of action under Missouri law, and that the plaintiffs had failed to state a proper claim.
“Plaintiffs have accurately argued that their complaint is rife with allegations of tortious conduct committed by defendants. However, plaintiffs’ complaint still fails to indicate what theories of liability they are asserting,” she wrote. “The complaint makes no attempt to allege the elements of any recognizable tort. Without this rudimentary component, it would be nearly impossible for defendant to answer the complaint, conduct efficient discovery, or analyze the merits of plaintiffs’ lawsuit.”
Just For Men Risks
The concerns about reports of “Just for Men” allergic reactions gained nationwide attention following a 2012 report by ConsumerAffairs.com, which noted that it was receiving a number of new complaints involving skin irritation, itching, blisters and chemical burns following “Just for Men” application.
Consumer Affairs has received more than 400 reports of burns or allergic reactions to “Just for Men” since the group first warned about the risk of allergic reactions in 2012.
Many of the men report using “Just for Men” dye for years without any issues, which some some suggest may raise questions about whether the manufacturer’s suggestion that users do a “patch test” on a small part of the body may be useless.
Additional “Just For Men” allergic reactions lawsuits are likely to be filed in the coming months, as a number of individuals throughout the U.S. have already contacted lawyers after suffering injuries that were reportedly caused by the hair and beard dye.