Products Liability Law Daily Wrap Up, DESIGN AND MANUFACTURING DEFECTS—CHEMICAL PRODUCTS—S.D.N.Y.: Woman pleads sufficient facts to sustain her product liability claim, (Oct 22, 2025)
Law Firms Mentioned:Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP | Johnson Becker PLLC | Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips Grossman
Organizations Mentioned:Colgate-Palmolive Co.
By Susan L. Smith, JD, MA
The court found that the woman adequately pleaded facts identifying the brand, the specific product, and the manufacturer.
The District Court of New York denied a manufacturer’s request to dismiss the product liability claim of a woman who alleged that she used the manufacturer’s cleaning product, which was contaminated with pseudomonas bacteria, and subsequently contracted a pseudomonas bacterial infection from the use of the product. The woman brought defective product claims under a negligence and strict liability theory, a breach-of-implied-warranty-of-merchantability theory, and a breach-of-implied-warranty-of-fitness-for-a-particular-purpose theory. The manufacturer, Colgate-Palmolive Co. (Colgate), contended that the complaint fails to state a claim because the woman does not allege any nonconclusory facts identifying the Fabuloso products she used, how the products were defective, or how they proximately caused her injury. The court concluded that, at the pleading stage, the woman sufficiently pleaded facts stating a claim for relief that is plausible on its face and denied the motion to dismiss (Butler v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., 24-CV-9558 (JAV) (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 10, 2025)).
Background. The woman alleged that she purchased a number of bottles of Fabuloso Multi-purpose Clear that she used to clean her home and salon. On January 21, 2023, she was diagnosed with pseudomonas, a bacterial infection, that ultimately led to a series of respiratory issues. About February 8, 2023, Colgate recalled more than 4.9 million Fabuloso Multi-Purpose Clears due to contamination with pseudomonas species bacteria. The recall notice warned that bacteria from the contaminated products can enter the consumer’s body if inhaled though the yes or through a break in the skin. The bacteria growth allegedly occurred because of a failure to add sufficient preservative during the manufacturing process.
Court’s analysis. The court noted that under New York law, the situs of a product liability tort for choice-of-law purposes is the place of the injury, rather than the location where the allegedly defective product was manufactured. Thus, Texas law applies. Under Texas law, a manufacturer of an unreasonably dangerous product is strictly liable for injuries caused by such product. The plaintiff must prove the product was defective when it left the hands of the manufacturer and the defect was a producing cause of the plaintiff’s injuries. A plaintiff is not required to show by direct proof how the product became defective or identify a specific engineering or structural defect.
Colgate argued that the complaint fails to state a claim because the woman does not allege any nonconclusory facts identifying the Fabuloso products she used, how those products were defective, or how they proximately caused her injury. The court stated that Colgate was correct that the complaint does not specifically allege that the woman bought one of its lots of Fabuloso Multi-Purpose Cleaner that was subject to the recall, nor does the complaint allege where and when the product was purchased. The court noted, however, none of the cases Colgate cited stand for the proposition that a plaintiff must provide such details at the pleading stage. In contrast to the cases Colgate cited, the woman alleged that the Fabuloso Multi-Purpose Cleaner was defective because it was contaminated with pseudomonas bacteria, identified the brand, the specific product, and the manufacturer. Thus, the denied Colgate’s motion to dismiss the complaint.
The case is No. 24-CV-9558 (JAV).
Judge: Vargas, J.
Attorneys: Adam John Kress (Johnson Becker PLLC) and Randi Alyson Kassan (Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips Grossman) for Sherry Elaine Butler. Erik Christopher DiMarco (Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP) for Colgate-Palmolive Co.
Companies: Colgate-Palmolive Co.
Cases: CourtDecisions DesignManufacturingNews ChemicalNews NewYorkNews