Results for "macy"

The Thread Count of Macy’s Bedding and Linens

January 9th, 2020

In January 2020, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Macy’s for allegedly misleadingly inflating the thread count of its bedding and linen products by improperly counting the fibers that make up the threads to get the thread count. (Chiaraluce et al v. Macy’s Inc., Macy’s Retail Holdings, Inc., Macy’s West Stores, Inc., and Macys.com, Case


Thread Count of Bed Linens At Macy’s

December 15th, 2017

In November 2017, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Macy’s, AQ Textiles, and Creative Textile Mills for allegedly deceptively marketing the quality of bed linens by inflating the thread count in advertisements. (Hawes et al v. Macy’s Inc., AQ Textiles LLC, and Creative Textile Mills, Case No. 17-cv-754, S. D. OH.) For more of TINA.org’s


Citizens of Humanity Jeans and Macy’s

April 28th, 2017

February 2017: A federal judge dismissed this case after the named plaintiff notified the Court that she did not intend to amend her complaint. December 2016: A federal judge granted the company’s motion to dismiss this action finding that the allegations were conclusory, did not state a plausible claim for relief, and did not meet


Sales at Macy’s and Bloomingdale’s

December 12th, 2016

September 2016: This action was consolidated to be heard with three other similar lawsuits. For more information about the other cases, click on the information below. Benson v. Macy’s, Inc. et al Farhang v. Macy’s Inc. et al Haley v. Macy’s Inc. et al This action was administratively closed because Haley was named the lead


Discounts at Macy’s and Bloomingdale’s

November 16th, 2016

October 2016: A Consolidated Class Action Complaint making similar allegations (i.e., the store misleadingly offers discounts off of false “original” prices) was filed. September 2016: This action was consolidated with three other similar lawsuits to be heard together. For more information about the cases, click on the case information below. Benson v. Macy’s, Inc., et


The Discounts at Macy’s and Bloomingdale’s

November 1st, 2016

September 2016: This action was consolidated with three other similar lawsuits to be heard together (and then administratively closed as another named plaintiff was named the lead plaintiff). For more information about the other cases, click the case information below. Benson v. Macy’s, Inc., et al Carder et al v. Macy’s, Inc. et al Haley


Macy’s and Bloomingdale’s Discounted Prices

November 1st, 2016

September 2016: This action was consolidated with three other lawsuits to be heard together. For more information about the other cases, click on the case information below. Carder et al v. Macy’s, Inc. et al Farhang v. Macy’s Inc. et al Haley et al v. Macy’s, Inc. et al This case was administratively closed because


The Enduring Primacy of Retail Sales in an MLM Context

October 23rd, 2015

This is a guest blog by Peter Vander Nat, Ph.D., former senior economist with the FTC who has testified in numerous federal pyramid scheme cases and written two seminal works analyzing the MLM industry. POST HIGHLIGHTS • Meaning of Amway rules (1979), especially the “70% rule” and subsequent deterioration • Koscot (1975), Omnitrition (1996), and


CVS Health Infants’ Pain & Fever Acetaminophen

April 1st, 2021

Allegations: Misleadingly marketing that the product is specifically formulated for infants and charging more for the infants’ product when it contains the same formulation of the same active ingredient in the children’s version


Algal-900 DHA

October 1st, 2019

September 2019: A federal judge granted final approval of the settlement agreement. May 2019: A federal judge preliminarily approved a settlement agreement. According to its terms, class members who have proof of purchase or a CVS ExtraCare account that shows a purchase of the product may receive a full refund; class members who do not


Lang Pharma Nutrition’s CoQ-10 Softgels

January 24th, 2019

In July 2018, a state judge preliminarily approved a settlement of a class-action lawsuit filed against Lang Pharma Nutrition (a company that supplies retailers with CoQ-10 supplements to sell under their store brand names) and four retailers who sell Lang supplements – Walmart, CVS, Walgreens, and Meijer – alleging that they misleadingly market store brand


CVS Enhanced Absorption Formula CoQ-10 Dietary Supplements

January 24th, 2019

May 2015: This lawsuit was dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. March 2015: A class-action lawsuit was filed against CVS Pharmacy and Lang Pharma Nutrition for allegedly falsely advertising CVS Enhanced Absorption Formula CoQ-10 dietary supplements as having enhanced absorption and supporting heart health when, according to the complaint, the supplements do not provide the


Thyroid Tablets

October 30th, 2018

In October 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed against Westminster Pharmaceuticals and CVS Pharmacy for allegedly representing that its Thyroid Tablets – a brand of generic prescription thyroid medication – is safe and of the highest quality when, according to plaintiffs, ingredients in the medication are adulterated (according to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic


MonaLisa Touch

October 30th, 2018

A class-action lawsuit was filed against Cynosure, Inc. for allegedly deceptively marketing the MonaLisa Touch laser system as a vaginal rejuvenation device that will increase intimacy and improve sexual function when, according to the complaint, the FDA has not approved the device for such purposes and the device is dangerous and may cause vaginal burns,


Gold Emblem® Red Fish Candy

October 19th, 2018

April 2018: A federal judge dismissed this case because the parties reported that they reached a settlement agreement. November 2017: A class-action lawsuit was filed against CVS for allegedly deceptively using ed plastic bags for Gold Emblem® red fish candy. According to the complaint, the bags of candy are less than half full and have


CVS’s Algal-900 DHA Supplement

July 17th, 2018

In July 2018, a class-action lawsuit was filed against CVS for allegedly marketing the supplement Algal-900 DHA as being clinically shown to improve memory and cognitive function and claiming the product is capable of reducing errors by “50% or more” in an “episodic memory test” when, according to the plaintiffs, the product does not work



Back to Top ↑