As class actions increasingly target the influencer marketing space, another major brand finds itself in legal hot water. In a recent class action against ALO Yoga plaintiffs accuse the brand and more than a dozen social media influencers of deceptive marketing practices based on their alleged failure to disclose paid endorsements on Instagram.
According to the 38-page complaint, ALO built its brand and customer base primarily through social media marketing. Plaintiffs allege that approximately 90% of the company's revenue is attributed to online sales and its ALO Moves platform, and that ALO's growth has been fueled by influencer promotions that misrepresent paid endorsements as organic opinions.
The named plaintiffs, Alina Sulici (Illinois) and Alex Chihaia (Florida), claim they purchased ALO products after viewing Instagram posts from influencers they followed. These posts included endorsements, praise, and tags of ALO products—none of which, they say, included required material connection disclosures. Plaintiffs allege they paid a premium for products based on the influencers' perceived impartiality and later concluded that the products were worth less than advertised.
The plaintiffs seek to represent a nationwide class and several subclasses, asserting causes of action under:
- The FTC Act (as a predicate for state law violations)
- Illinois and California consumer protection statutes
- State unfair trade practices laws in more than 20 states
- Unjust enrichment and negligent misrepresentation
They seek more than $150 million in damages, along with restitution, injunctive relief, and attorneys' fees.
As we've noted in prior posts (e.g., Beyond the FTC: Class Actions Hit Influencer Marketing and Another One: Revolve Hit with $50M Class Action Over Undisclosed Influencer Ads), plaintiffs are increasingly turning to state unfair and deceptive acts and practices laws to challenge influencer conduct. The takeaway? Review your influencer protocols before the FTC—or a class action—does it for you.
The case is Sulici et al. v. Color Image Apparel d/b/a Alo Yoga et al., No. 1:25CV03928 (N.D. Ill., E. Div. April 11, 2025).
This alert provides general coverage of its subject area. We provide it with the understanding that Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz is not engaged herein in rendering legal advice, and shall not be liable for any damages resulting from any error, inaccuracy, or omission. Our attorneys practice law only in jurisdictions in which they are properly authorized to do so. We do not seek to represent clients in other jurisdictions.
