Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Crepps v. Conopco, Inc.

United States District Court, E.D. Missouri, Eastern Division

December 10, 2019

DAN CREPPS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v.
CONOPCO, INC., d/b/a "UNILEVER," DOES 1 through 10, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

          RONNIE L. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         This matter is before the Court on the Motion to Transfer and Coordinate Pre-Trial Proceedings (ECF No. 12) and Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 14) filed by Defendant Conopco, Inc., d/b/a "Unilever" and Does 1 through 10 (referred to collectively as "Defendants"), and the Joint Motion for Extension of Time and Entry of Briefing Schedule (ECF No. 17). Because Plaintiff Dan Crepps's Second Amended Class Action Complaint (ECF No. 16) is now the operative complaint in this action, the Court denies Defendants' Motion to Dismiss as moot as it is directed at the First Amended Class Action Petition filed in state court. After careful consideration, the Court grants the Motion to Transfer and Coordinate Pre-Trial Proceedings and implements the parties' agreed briefing scheduling.

         BACKGROUND

         Plaintiff Dan Crepps, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, filed this putative class action against Defendant. Plaintiff alleges Defendants' "UltraClear Black White" line of antiperspirant products causes the "yellow stains" and "white marks" on clothing that it purports to prevent. The Second Amended Class Action Complaint asserts the following counts relating to the nationwide class: breach of warranty (Count I); breach of implied contract (Count II); and unjust enrichment (Count III). Additionally, Plaintiff asserts Defendant violated the Missouri Merchandizing Practices Act (MMPA) (Count IV) and seeks injunctive relief on behalf of the Missouri subclass (Count V).

         In addition to this case, seven other putative class actions have been filed in this district by Plaintiffs Dan Crepps, Jamie Richards, and Carla Been:

Crepps v. Conopco, Inc., No. 4:19-cv-02723-AGF (E.D. Mo.) ("Crepps III);
Richards v. Conopco, Inc., No. 4:19-cv-02556-HEA (E.D. Mo.) ("Richards I);
Richards v. Conopco, Inc., No. 4:19-cv-02558-SRC (E.D. Mo.) ("Richards II);
Richards v. Conopco, Inc., No. 4:19-cv-02726-AGF (E.D. Mo.) ("Richards III);
Richards v. Conopco, Inc., No. 4:19-cv-02728-SRC (E.D. Mo.) ("Richards IV');
Been v. Conopco, Inc., No. 4:19-cv-02703-SRC (E.D. Mo.) ("Been I; and
Been v. Conopco, Inc., No. 4:19-cv-02704-RLW (E.D. Mo.) ("Been II).

         Defendant filed the instant Motion to Transfer and Coordinate Pre-Trial Proceedings (ECF No. 12), arguing all eight cases are substantially similar and appropriate for coordination of pre-trial proceedings pursuant to Local Rule 4.03[1]and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 42(a). Defendant notes that Plaintiffs counsel consents to the requested coordination of pre-trial proceedings. Furthermore, the deadline by which to file any formal objection has since passed.

         LEGAL ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.