Beardsall v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc.

Dist. Ct. did not err in granting defendants' motion for summary judgment in plaintiffs' action under Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Practices Act, alleging that labels for defendants’ aloe vera gel products were deceptive, because: (1) defendants’ products could not be called “aloe vera gel,” since they only had low concentrations of acemannan, which, plaintiffs maintained, was important therapeutic substance for treatment of dry, sunburned skin; (2) defendants’ products did not provide therapeutic effects that one would expect from product marketed as aloe vera gel; and (3) defendants’ labels falsely indicated that product was “100% Pure Aloe Vera Gel,” where fine print indicated that two percent of content was devoted to preservatives. Plaintiffs failed to present evidence to show outside of their own allegations that defendants’ labels were likely to mislead consumers about nature or quality of product or that some minimum amount of acemannan was necessary to render product effective. Ct. rejected plaintiffs' contention that burden was on defendants to prove that their products were effective. Also, defendants' label of “100% Pure Aloe Vera Gel” was not deceptive, since plaintiffs conceded that presence of preservatives in small amounts was acceptable and something that they had expected.