Dooney & Bourke Discounts

October 2016: This action was dismissed with prejudice because the plaintiff did not file an amended complaint.

July 2016: A federal judge dismissed the case finding that, among other things, the named plaintiff failed to sufficiently allege why and how the discount pricing was false or misleading. The judge gave the plaintiff 14 days to file an amended complaint.

February 2016: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Dooney & Bourke, Inc. for allegedly deceptively advertising discounts at outlet stores by comparing discounted prices to false market prices. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the market prices were artificially inflated and were never the original prices. In addition, the complaint alleges that the market prices were not the prevailing market retail prices within the three months immediately before the advertisement, as required by California law. (Rael et al v. Dooney & Bourke, Inc. and Does 1-50, Case No. 16-cv-371, S. D. CA.)

For more information about misleadingly advertised discounts and’s coverage of the issue, click here.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled.

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

Back to Top ↑
  • Search Class-Action Tracker

  • Recent Class Actions

  • The Class-Action Tracker is intended to notify consumers about false advertising class-action lawsuits filed around the country, but does not necessarily reflect’s opinion with respect to the lawsuits or disposition of the cases

  • Sign Up for E-mail Updates