Mattel Lawsuit: "Wicked" Dolls Contained Inappropriate Website Link

Case Overview: A class action lawsuit claims Mattel's "Wicked" dolls contained an inappropriate website link, misleading consumers and prompting a recall.

Consumers Affected: Consumers who purchased the Mattel "Wicked" dolls.

Court: U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Mattel, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit after its "Wicked" dolls, marketed to children aged 4 and older, were found to contain a website link directing users to a pornographic site. The dolls were released as part of the merchandise for the Wicked movie adaptation.

"Wicked" Dolls Link to Explicit Website

South Carolina resident Holly Ricketson purchased one of these dolls in November 2024 for her child. The packaging featured a printed web address, “Wicked.com,” which the lawsuit claims led to explicit material rather than content related to the toy or movie.

According to the complaint, Ricketson’s daughter used a phone to visit the link and encountered inappropriate content. The filing alleges that families purchasing the dolls had no way of knowing the website would be unsuitable for children.

By including an inappropriate website link, the lawsuit argues, Mattel violated the trust families placed in its products and labeling.

Mattel Recalls Dolls, Lawsuit Continues

After reports surfaced, Mattel issued a recall for the dolls and apologized for the error. However, the company did not offer refunds to customers who had already purchased the toys.

The recall addressed the removal of the dolls from shelves, but the lawsuit argues it did not adequately compensate families who had been affected.

Ricketson’s lawsuit accuses Mattel of negligence, unjust enrichment, and breaching both express and implied warranties. It also claims violations of consumer protection laws by marketing the dolls as suitable for children while failing to ensure they met those standards.

Other Lawsuits Target Mattel Products

Mattel is currently facing other lawsuits related to its products. Legal action involving the Hatch Baby Sound Machine alleges risks of electric shock due to a defective power adapter. Another lawsuit claims the Snuga Swing, marketed under the Fisher-Price brand, poses suffocation risks for infants.

Both cases highlight concerns over whether Mattel adequately informed consumers of potential risks associated with its products.

In the Mattel Wicked dolls class action lawsuit, Ricketson is seeking to represent all consumers who purchased the recalled dolls. She is suing for negligence, unjust enrichment, and breach of both express and implied warranties. The lawsuit also requests damages for consumers who purchased the dolls and an injunction to prevent similar issues from occurring in the future.

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Ricketson, et al. v. Mattel Inc.
• Case Number: 2:24-cv-10389
• Court: U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

Plaintiffs' Attorneys

• Eric M. Poulin and Roy T. Willey, IV (Poulin | Willey | Anastopoulo, LLC)

Did you purchase the Mattel 'Wicked' dolls? Share your thoughts on this lawsuit in the comments below.