Class action targets Tom's of Maine for natural product claims.

Byline: Pat Murphy

A recently filed class action alleges that Tom's of Maine violates both Massachusetts and Rhode Island consumer protection law by falsely advertising that its toothpaste and deodorant products are made from "natural" ingredients.

According to a complaint filed on Dec. 13 in U.S. District Court in Boston against Tom's of Maine and its parent, Colgate-Palmolive Co., products including Tom's Simply White toothpaste and Tom's Original Care deodorant, despite being marketed as "natural," are not in fact "natural."

"The reality is that the Products contain a host of artificial, synthetic and/or chemically processed ingredients including but not limited to Glycerin, Propylene Glycol, Sodium Lauryl Sulfate, Aluminum Cholorohydrate, Xantham Gum, Sorbitol, Ascorbic Acid and Xylitol," states the complaint filed in Munsell v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.

The lead plaintiff in the case, Angela Munsell, alleges that she began regularly purchasing Tom's toothpaste and deodorant toward the end of 2015 when she was a resident of Taunton. She says she continued her loyalty to the Tom's brand when she moved to Pawtucket, Rhode Island, in spring 2016.

The lawsuit claims the defendants' conduct constitutes unfair and deceptive acts and practices in violation of Massachusetts' G.L.c. 93A and Rhode Island's G.L. 6-13.1.

The suit proposes certification of a Massachusetts class of those who purchased Tom's toothpaste or deodorant products in Massachusetts between Dec. 5, 2015, and the present, and certification of a similar Rhode Island class.

The plaintiff is represented by Boston's Edward F. Haber, who did not respond to a request for comment.

A Tom's spokesperson said in an email that the company believes the challenges to its use of the term "natural" are without merit and that it would defend them "vigorously."

But the plaintiff does have a viable 93A claim for false advertising under regulations promulgated by the Attorney General's Office, according to James L. O'Connor Jr. of Nickless, Phillips & O'Connor in Fitchburg.

"It's an objective standard," O'Connor says. "The standard is 'could it mislead' not 'did it mislead.' Applying an objective standard, the complaint states a colorable claim."

The Munsell class action alleges the type of wrong that the consumer protection statutes are specifically designed to address, adds Laura D. Mangini of Alekman DiTusa in...