Larsen v. Walmart, Inc.

C.D. Cal. · No. 5:26-cv-05753

No federal docket timeline hydrated for this case yet (state-court settlements have no RECAP docket).

Our records for this case (1)

Matter	Type	Practice area	Court	Date	Value
Walmart, Inc.source ↗ filed by Kuzyk Law LLP · No. 5:26-cv-05753 · 28:1332 Diversity-Fraud · view case timeline → Comparable settlements $200M–$740M ▾ False advertising claims survive dismissal roughly half the time in comparable rulings (e.g., Dougherty's consumer-protection claims survived, but Citizens of Humanity's 'Made in USA' claim failed on probable cause). Walmart's scale invites large-class exposure but no direct false-advertising comparable exists in the set provided. Comparable settlements $200M–$740M median $299.50M · n=10 DiDi Global Inc. $740M · Merck & Co. Inc. a $688M · Toyota Industries $436M Per member (realized): ~$2,500 median · $2,500–$2,500 (n=1) Comparable verdict: Papaya $420M · Vital Pharmaceutical $293M Key precedent: Citizens of Humanity v. Donboli — shows 'Made in USA'/labeling-style false advertising claims can fail decisively at trial and on appeal. Main risk: Class certification/individualized reliance issues, as in Guthrie v. Transamerica where UCL claims failed for requiring individualized inquiry. This defendant: Walmart has multiple pending consumer-protection filings (Privacy/Wiretap, ADA) and a prior $9.5M Fees/Auto-Renewal settlement, suggesting recurring consumer-claim exposure. Rough EV model (wide — class size is the big unknown, not a prediction): $2.50M–$250M Single-case per-member benchmark and no direct false-advertising verdict comparable make this estimate highly speculative; true value depends heavily on product category and proof of reliance. · grounded in 10 rulings, 10 settlements, 9 verdicts	Filing	False Advertising	C.D. Cal.	2026-09-29	$200M–$740M comparable settlements