The main TULA Skincare lawsuit was a 2021 class action alleging the brand marketed products as containing probiotics when they did not actually contain live cultures. TULA denied wrongdoing but agreed to a $5 million settlement and to change its labeling. A separate California Proposition 65 notice was filed against the company in 2024 over a chemical in one of its moisturizers, and a former employee filed a discrimination suit in New Jersey in 2022.
What the Probiotic Class Action Alleged
The case, Morrissey, et al. v. TULA Life Inc., was filed in June 2021 in the Circuit Court of DuPage County, Illinois (Case No. 2021L000646).1Truth in Advertising. Tula Skincare Cosmetics Containing Probiotics Plaintiffs said TULA advertised cleansers, serums, creams, and scrubs as containing probiotics, leading consumers to believe the products held live probiotic cultures when they did not.2Top Class Actions. TULA Life Skincare Products Class Action Settlement
The distinction matters because “probiotic” generally implies living microorganisms, while cosmetic products typically contain preservatives that kill bacteria. Industry observers have described ingredients in such products as “postbiotics,” meaning dead microorganisms or their metabolic byproducts, rather than live cultures capable of colonizing the skin.3Davis+Gilbert LLP. CBD and Probiotics – Natural Products Insider
TULA denied all allegations. The court never ruled on the merits. Judge Robert G. Kleeman granted preliminary approval of the settlement on July 26, 2021, with a final approval hearing set for October 26, 2021.4Truth in Advertising. Morrissey v. Tula Life – Preliminary Approval Order
Who Was Eligible and How Much They Got
The settlement covered anyone in the United States, its territories, and districts who bought TULA skincare products between January 1, 2013, and August 30, 2021. The claim deadline was December 10, 2021.2Top Class Actions. TULA Life Skincare Products Class Action Settlement
Payments depended on documentation:
- Without proof of purchase, a flat $4 cash payment.
- With proof of purchase, a refund of 10% of the amount paid for covered products, or $4, whichever was greater, capped at $25 per household.
Those amounts were subject to adjustment based on claim volume. Class members reported receiving checks by mid-February 2022.2Top Class Actions. TULA Life Skincare Products Class Action Settlement
Beyond the cash fund, TULA agreed to update its labeling and packaging to explicitly state that its products do not contain live cultures. The company’s own website has since shifted from “probiotic” to “prebiotic” language when describing its formulations.5TULA Skincare. About Us Plaintiffs were represented by Bursor & Fisher, P.A.; Barbat, Mansour, Suciu & Tomina PLLC; and Nick Larry Law LLC.4Truth in Advertising. Morrissey v. Tula Life – Preliminary Approval Order
Can You Still File a Claim?
No. The claims window closed on December 10, 2021, and the settlement is closed. Payments have already been distributed.
The 2024 California Proposition 65 Notice
In August 2024, a nonprofit called the Initiative for Safer Cosmetics filed a 60-day notice of intent to sue TULA Life, Inc. and retailer Sephora USA under California’s Proposition 65. The notice alleged that TULA’s 24-7 Moisture Hydrating Day & Night Cream contained diethanolamine, a chemical listed as a carcinogen under Proposition 65 since 2012, without the required consumer warning.6California Office of the Attorney General. Proposition 65 Notice – TULA Skincare
Under Proposition 65, private parties must give businesses and government authorities 60 days’ notice before filing a formal lawsuit. If a government agency acts during that window, the private party cannot proceed on its own. Potential penalties include up to $2,500 per day for each violation, plus a court order to stop selling the product without a warning.
The notice fits a broader wave. Proposition 65 notices targeting diethanolamine in personal care products surged in 2024, with more than 300 notices issued by mid-June of that year, compared to an average of roughly 26 per year over the prior decade.7Exponent. Rise in Prop 65 Notices of Violation for Diethanolamine In at least one comparable case involving a different skincare company, a diethanolamine claim was resolved through a consent judgment involving modest civil penalties, attorney fees, and either reformulation or new product warnings.8California Office of the Attorney General. Proposition 65 Settlement – Olive and Delmar
A Separate Employment Suit
Former employee Caitlin McLarnon filed a lawsuit against TULA Life in New Jersey on March 25, 2022, docketed as L-001925-22 in Essex County Superior Court. It was brought under New Jersey’s Law Against Discrimination and is not a class action.9Smith Mullin. McLarnon v. Tula – Case Information Statement The plaintiff’s firm, Smith Mullin, has listed the case among its active matters, and no public outcome has been reported.10Smith Mullin. McLarnon v. Tula