* Taylor Lodise is a law clerk in the Litigation practice group.
On November 9, 2022, amidst ongoing investigations by the FTC regarding “dark patterns” that Amazon allegedly employed to discourage subscribers from canceling their Amazon Prime memberships, a class-action lawsuit named Amazon as a defendant. The lawsuit was filed in United States District Court for the Western District of Washington and is styled Dorobiala v. Amazon.com, Inc.
* Taylor Lodise is a law clerk in the Litigation practice group.
In one of several related class-action lawsuits against the maker of a drink marketed under the brand name Joint Juice, Chief Judge Richard Seeborg of the United States District Court, Northern District of California, applied case law from 103 years ago to reduce statutory damages in a consumer class action from the $91.4 million seemingly required by a New York statute to just $8.3 million plus pre-judgment interest of $4.5 million. The August ruling was based on Fourteenth Amendment due process protections as interpreted by the Supreme Court in the 1919 case St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. Williams (“St. Louis”).
* Rachel Gold is a law clerk in the Corporate/Securities Law practice group.
Panera Bread Company (“Panera”) is facing a class action lawsuit that alleges its Unlimited Sip Club (“Club”) is in fact not so unlimited. According to Panera’s own promotional materials, the Club is a refill program where members pay $10.99 per month for access to lemonade, soda, coffee, and tea drinks of “any size” at “any time.”
Juice Joint facing catastrophic liability after jury decides against it on the merits
Faced with a series of class-action lawsuits over its Joint Juice drink, Premier Nutrition Corp. has lost the first jury trial and is now fighting back against what could be a devastating financial blow if it loses a post-trial motion scheduled to be heard next month in the Northern District of California. The company was found by a jury to have falsely touted the health benefits of the drink, so the issue is no longer whether the claims were defensible, but how much the marketer will have to pay to the class of purchasers.
TCPA liability reduced to $500 for Gold’s Gym
A recent ruling out of the Central District of California will prove to be very useful for telemarketers faced with class actions under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (“TCPA”). In Bustillos v. West Covina Corporate Fitness, Inc., United States District Judge Stanley Blumenfeld, Jr. denied an order seeking class certification where it was clear that the call in question violated the TCPA.
Defendants plagued by failure to include arbitration clause in sweepstakes rules
A class-action lawsuit against an online sweepstakes operator will go forward despite the plaintiffs’ admitted agreement to an arbitration clause. The sweepstakes offered the chance to win $1.2 million in Dogecoin, a type of cryptocurrency. The plaintiffs in the Northern District of California district court action, styled Suski v. Marden-Kane et al., initially agreed to arbitrate all disputes at the time they opened their online accounts with defendant Coinbase Global, Inc.
Class action attorneys score a victory
As reported in The New Jersey Law Journal (subscription required), Olshan partner Scott Shaffer achieved a full dismissal with prejudice of a class-action lawsuit filed under New Jersey’s Consumer Fraud Act.
Reckitt Benckiser agrees to pay $53 million to end class actions regarding dietary supplement pain relief claims.
Issue of Ascertainability Blocks Plaintiff From Proceeding On Class Basis
A high-profile trial involving a potential Presidential nominee, especially during elections, will make it difficult to facilitate a fair trial and allow forward progress in the case.
Olshan Partners Andrew Lustigman and Scott Shaffer authored an article published in the New York Law Journal’s Cybersecurity Law Report on June 3, 2016, entitled “Online Discount Pricing Policies Face Increasing Scrutiny”, illuminating the issues surrounding online pricing practices.
Luxury retailers Burberry and Coach were the latest retailers to be hit with class action lawsuits involving accusations of deceptive pricing and discount advertising of merchandise sold at their outlet stores. The lawsuits are part of a growing trend focusing on allegations of deceptive outlet and discount store comparative pricing.
Retailers across the country have been facing private class action lawsuits alleging that certain discount pricing practices constitute false advertising based on the allegation that the discount is fictitious. Discount retailer, Kohl's, recently obtained dismissal of one such action.
CLIENT ALERT
Marketers who communicate with consumers on mobile devices and smart phones must stay current with the FCC's new rulings.
The Ninth Circuit’s ruling allows selective posting and arranging of content but does not preclude future lawsuits.
On September 17, 2013, from 12:30-1:30pm Eastern time, Olshan will present the webinar Important Changes To The Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA): What You and Your Client Need To Know.
As class actions and other forms of litigation continue to plague corporate America as a major cost of doing business, businesses should be cognizant of one potent antidote that has repeatedly received judicial approval: mandatory arbitration clauses.
The Supreme Court of the United States has closed a loophole used by class action plaintiffs to avoid trying their cases federal court. The case, entitled Standard Fire Insurance v. Knowles, was decided on March 19, 2013.