Dove Vitality Renewal collagen body wash lawsuit (Fitzgerald v. Unilever)

A New York shopper has sued Unilever United States, Inc., the company behind the Dove brand. She claims Dove Vitality Renewal Firming Body Wash is marketed as containing collagen when its ingredient list shows only "Vegetable Collagen." The case is Fitzgerald v. Unilever United States, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-01488, filed July 31, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York in Albany.

Collagen is a protein that comes only from animals and people. The complaint says a plant-derived ingredient cannot be collagen, so it argues the front label claim "4% Restoring Serum with Collagen" misleads buyers.

The complaint proposes separate buyer groups in New York, 30 other states and the District of Columbia. No court has ruled on the claims, no class has been certified and there is no settlement or claim form. Unilever had not filed a response in the docket entries available on October 20, 2026.

Unilever United States, Inc. is the U.S. arm of the consumer goods company Unilever. The complaint describes it as a Delaware corporation based at 111 River Street in Hoboken, New Jersey. It says Unilever makes, labels, advertises and sells the body wash under the Dove brand in New York and nationwide. Dove sells soaps, body washes, deodorants and hair care products.

The plaintiff, Lillian Fitzgerald, lives in Rensselaer, New York. According to the complaint, she bought the body wash for her own use on Walmart's website around July 2025. She says she saw the collagen claim before buying, relied on it and paid a price premium she would not have paid had she known the product contained no animal collagen.

She is represented by Gucovschi Law Firm PLLC of New York City, through attorneys Adrian Gucovschi and Nathaniel H. Sari. The case is assigned to U.S. District Judge Mae A. D'Agostino, with U.S. Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Stewart.

Dove's current product page sells the 18.5-ounce Vitality Renewal Serum Body Wash for "mature skin." It says the wash is "infused with a 4% restoring serum with collagen" and promotes "firmer, supple skin." The same page lists "Vegetable Collagen" among the ingredients and describes the product as PETA-Certified Vegan.

The complaint says the claim appears on the front label and in online listings. It says a Walmart.com listing shows a "what's in it" graphic naming "Collagen" as an ingredient and product photos that suggest the wash contains collagen.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff's lawyers mailed Unilever a written notice on August 6, 2025. The letter described the collagen claim, demanded restitution and offered Unilever a chance to fix the problem. The complaint says Unilever did not act and the label is unchanged. The lawsuit followed almost a year later. Top Class Actions reported on the case on October 13, 2026.

The plaintiff says "vegetable collagen" is a contradiction because collagen exists only in animals. She cites Kandel v. Dr. Dennis Gross Skincare, a 2024 federal decision in Manhattan, which described collagen as "a protein found exclusively in humans and animals" and allowed similar claims against a skin care brand to proceed. The complaint also cites a 2023 California federal ruling in a similar collagen case.

The complaint argues that collagen is a sought-after ingredient. It cites reports that collagen sales more than doubled between 2018 and 2020. The plaintiff says Unilever used the name of that ingredient to sell a product without it.

It brings 35 counts: New York General Business Law sections 349 and 350, consumer protection laws in 30 other states and the District of Columbia, breach of express warranty under New York law and unjust enrichment.

Unilever has not stated a position in court. Class Action Pulse found no public statement from Unilever or Dove about the lawsuit as of October 20, 2026. Its product page continues to use the collagen wording and also lists the ingredient as "Vegetable Collagen," but that page is marketing copy, not a response to the lawsuit.

The court has issued only routine orders. On August 3, 2026, it issued a filing order that set an initial conference for November 2, 2026, at 10:00 a.m. in Albany. On August 4, it issued a notice that the case is part of Judge D'Agostino's case disposition pilot program.

The court has not decided whether the label is misleading, whether "vegetable collagen" can be called collagen or whether any class should be certified.

The proposed classes cover people who bought the body wash mainly for personal, family or household use, not for resale, during the longest period each state's statute of limitations allows. Each jurisdiction is its own subclass.

The groups exclude Unilever and its officers and directors, and the assigned judge and the judge's staff. Buyers in states not on the list, such as Texas or Massachusetts, are outside every group as currently written. The plaintiff can ask to change the definitions.

There is no claim form and no deadline. Buyers can:

• Check Walmart, Amazon, Target or store loyalty account histories for the purchase.
• Keep the bottle or a photo of the front label and ingredient list.
• Watch for news of the November 2 conference and any motion to dismiss.
• Contact the Gucovschi Law Firm or their own lawyer with questions.

No money is available now. The complaint asks for compensatory, statutory and punitive damages, interest, restitution, attorneys' fees and costs. For New York buyers, it seeks the greater of actual damages or $50 under section 349, and the greater of actual damages or $500 under section 350, with possible increases if the court finds a willful violation. These are requests, not awards. The complaint does not ask for an order changing the label.

• July 2025: The plaintiff buys the body wash on Walmart.com.
• August 6, 2025: Her lawyers send Unilever the pre-suit notice letter.
• July 31, 2026: The complaint is filed.
• August 3, 2026: The court sets the initial conference.
• November 2, 2026: Initial conference in Albany.

No opt-out, objection or claim deadlines exist. If a class is certified or a settlement is reached, a notice would explain members' rights.

• Collagen: A structural protein found in skin, bones and tendons of animals and people.
• Vegetable collagen: The name on the ingredient list. The complaint says it is a plant-derived ingredient, not true collagen.
• Express warranty: A specific promise about a product, such as a label statement, that the seller is legally bound to honor.
• Pre-suit notice: A letter sent before filing that describes the claim and gives the company a chance to fix it.
• Subclass: A smaller group within a class, here one for each state.
• Initial conference: An early meeting where the judge and lawyers set a case schedule.

Unilever must answer the complaint or move to dismiss it. The November 2 conference should set the schedule for the case. Questions likely to come first include whether a reasonable shopper would read "with collagen" to mean animal collagen and whether one New York buyer can represent buyers in 31 other jurisdictions.

The complaint lists the product by its Walmart page, but Dove sells the same wash through other retailers. Readers who bought it elsewhere should keep their records, because the proposed classes are defined by state of purchase, not by store.

This article relies on the complaint, the court docket, Dove's product page and Top Class Actions' report.

The price premium, the notice letter's contents and the claim that the label is misleading are allegations. The docket view comes from a public archive and may not show every filing. Sales figures, the size of any premium and the number of buyers are unknown. Unilever's position is unknown.

Class Action Pulse is not a law firm or settlement administrator and does not guarantee eligibility or payment. This article is general information, not legal advice.