Consumers Claim Hanes Deceptively Advertises 'Run-Resistant' L'eggs Product

Two consumers have filed a proposed class action against Hanesbrands Inc. that alleges the company deceptively and unconscionably markets and advertises its L’eggs brand of socks, tights and hosiery as having “innovative run resistant technology.”

What does the lawsuit say?

The suit’s primary takeaway is that despite Hanebrands’ marketing and package labeling, there is little that differentiates its L’eggs products from other socks, tights and hosiery.

“[Hanesbrand] has consistently conveyed the very specific message to consumers throughout the United States, including New York, that the products ‘guard against runs and tears.’ [The plaintiffs] purchased the products assuming that the defendant’s claims about the quality and technology of the products are truthful and accurate,” the case reads. “In reality, the products feel no different than regular hosiery products and do not merit any pricing premium.”

What products are mentioned in the suit?

The 27-page lawsuit says consumers who purchased the L’eggs products listed below were allegedly misled by the defendant’s bombardment of “unreliable and misleading language” into thinking the products’ “innovative run resistant technology” would, in fact, prevent more runs:

(Note: Some of the above products are also available in two- or multi-packs.)

The case further claims the plaintiffs and proposed class members substantially relied on the defendant’s packaging and labeling (see below) of the above-mentioned products, and would not have paid such a premium price for the socks, tights and hosiery had they known Hanesbrands’ “innovative run resistant technology” was simply a marketing ploy.

“[The defendant] violated statutes enacted in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia, which are designed to protect consumers against unfair, deceptive, fraudulent and unconscionable trade and business practices and false advertising,” the complaint alleges.

What about the plaintiffs’ experience?

The complaint outlines that both named plaintiffs behind the lawsuit had similar experiences with Hanesbrand’s Silken Mist products. Each plaintiff allegedly used L’eggs brand products only a few times before encountering “holes and runs as quickly and as often” as they did wearing other tights and hosiery products.

The central theme, the case notes, is that the plaintiffs each expected their L’eggs products to last longer than similar tights and hosiery. The women both allege they would not have paid a premium price for Hanesbrand’s L’eggs had they known they would experience the same durability problems as other, less expensive products.

Who is covered by the proposed class action?

The lawsuit seeks to cover both a nationwide class of consumers who purchased Hanesbrands’ L’eggs products during the applicable limitations period, as well as a New York-specific subclass of individuals who bought the products within the state during the court-appointed timeframe.

The full complaint can be read below.