top of page
iStock-172771324 bebé JJ_editado_editado_e
Submission period has ended
Have you used at least one of these Baby Products at any time from 2019 to now (you can check multiple choices): Obligatorio
Do you have a receipt?
Johnson's Baby Products' labels claim that they are Tear-Free, Free of Parabens, Phthalates, Dyes. Which claims, if any, influenced your decision to buy Johnson's Baby Products (you can check multiple choices)? Obligatorio
Were you aware that by buying Johnson's Baby Product(s) you were paying a higher price than you would have paid for some similar products without such health claims (you can check multiple choices)? Obligatorio
Upload Receipt Image
Upload supported file (Max 15MB)
Upload Receipt PDF
Upload supported file (Max 15MB)

Thank you for submitting! We hope to talk to you soon!

Demanda colectiva por productos para bebés de Johnson & Johnson

This class action suit alleges that "Phthalates-Free" Baby Shampoo, Baby Head-To-Toe Wash, Baby Bar (Soap), Baby Wipes (Baby Cleansing Cloth) have tested positive for Phthalates.

The stakes could be high for the child of a purchaser of these products since phthalates are being studied for impairment of childrens' intellectual abilities, including lowering their IQ, increasing risk for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder, damaging their brain tissues, a possible link to brest cancer, and much more.

If you have bought one of these Baby Products, you might be entitled to compensation. To participate in the lawsuit, you don't need to have a child, it is sufficient if you purchased one of Baby Products for your personal use.

¿Cuáles son algunas de las compensaciones que reciben los representantes de la clase en casos de demandas colectivas?

Algunos ejemplos recientes incluyen :

Wells contra Allstate Ins. Co. , 557 F. Supp. 2d 1 (DDC 2008):

Los abogados del grupo solicitan la aprobación de... 10.000 dólares para cada uno de los demandantes nombrados... El tribunal concluye que esta solicitud —una pequeña parte del acuerdo total— es razonable. Este Tribunal ha... determinado que la concesión de incentivos a los demandantes nombrados no es infrecuente en los litigios de demandas colectivas, en particular cuando se ha creado un fondo común para el beneficio de todo el grupo. Lorazepam , 2003 WL 22037741, pág. *10.

Rogers contra Lumina Solar , Inc., No. 18-cv-2128 (KBJ) (DDC 19 de junio de 2020):

"Una indemnización por servicios prestados por $5,000 al demandante nombrado es razonable dadas las circunstancias de este caso".

Trout contra The Select Grp. Fed. , Acción Civil 21-1684 (RBW) (DDC 10 de octubre de 2023):


El acuerdo de conciliación propuesto establece que la demandante “Trout recibirá $4,000.00 por sus esfuerzos para iniciar y procesar [este caso]”.

bottom of page