Stark & Stark attorneys have filed a putative class action lawsuit against helmet maker Riddell, alleging that advertising claiming its products help reduce concussions was false or misleading. The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Camden, New Jersey, asserts that the plaintiff spent $459 on a Revolution helmet, after the plaintiff’s son viewed a video advertisement on the Internet. The Riddell helmet cost at least $50 more than competitive helmets, and at least 1000 Revolution helmets were sold in New Jersey. The lawsuit alleges that the purchasers were induced to pay more by faulty advertising claims. Riddell advertisements asserted that their helmet, utilizing “concussion reduction technology”, reduced injury risks by 31%. The basis for the assertion was a University of Pittsburgh Medical Center study, which compared concussion rates between two groups of high school players. The study was partly overseen by Riddell’s vice president of research and development, and the lawsuit alleges that the methodology used in the study led to shoddy science. In fact, the lawsuit alleges, scientific studies show that the brand of football helmet makes no difference in the player’s risk of concussion and that high-tech helmets like the Revolution do not reduce concussion risk for players any more effectively than low-cost helmets. Riddell has stopped running the claim that injury risks are reduced by 31%.…