Robitussin maker settles lawsuit in US over 'non-drowsy' claim

[July 23, 2024]  By Jonathan Stempel

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The maker of Robitussin settled a consumer lawsuit that claimed its "non-drowsy" cough and flu medicine causes drowsiness, agreeing to pay $4.5 million and remove the "non-drowsy" claim from its packaging and marketing.

A preliminary settlement with Haleon, which was spun off by GSK in July 2022, was filed on Monday in the White Plains, New York, federal court and requires a judge's approval. Haleon denied wrongdoing in agreeing to settle.

Consumers in the proposed class action claimed that GSK and later Haleon misled them by labeling at least 16 Robitussin products that contain the active ingredient dextromethorphan hydrobromide as non-drowsy.

They cited medical research and a 2017 GSK presentation for their claim, and said the Federal Aviation Administration forbids pilots from flying after taking medicine containing the ingredient.

The named plaintiffs, Nancy Calchi of Bloomingburg, New York, and Stacey Papalia of Ossining, New York, said they would not have bought Robitussin products in reliance on the "non-drowsy" claim had they known the truth.

Haleon did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Lawyers for the consumers did not immediately respond to similar requests.

The settlement covers Robitussin purchasers from Feb. 16, 2016 to the present.

Robitussin products, which are a Pfizer brand, are pictured at a Walgreens store in Pasadena, California, U.S. January 31, 2017. REUTERS/Mario Anzuoni/File Photo

Payouts may total $1.50 to $4.75 per claim, depending on the number of claims. As much as $2.05 million, or 46% of the settlement, could go toward legal fees and settlement expenses.

A trial judge dismissed the lawsuit in March 2023, prompting an appeal by the consumers. The appeal was put on hold while the parties negotiated a settlement, court papers show.

The cases are Calchi v GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Holdings (US) LLC et al, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 22-01341; and Papalia v GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Holdings (US) LLC in the same court, No. 22-02630.

(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Aurora Ellis)

[© 2024 Thomson Reuters. All rights reserved.]This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.  Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content.