CATrends: Deceptive Influencer Marketing
It’s a hot sponcon summer.
April 2017: This case was dismissed and consolidated with another lawsuit against the store, Sperling v. Stein Mart.
March 2017: One of the named plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed his claims When a complaint is dismissed without prejudice, an amended version of the complaint can be refiled., the reasons for which have not been disclosed. The claims of the other named plaintiff and the class remain pending. (Schuh et al v. Stein Mart, Inc., Case No. 17-cv-159, C. D. CA.)
January 2017: A class-action lawsuit was filed against Stein Mart for allegedly deceptively advertising pricing discounts by comparing its price to a false market price to make customers think they are receiving a substantial discount when, in reality, they are not. (Morales et al v. Stein Mart, Inc. and Does 1-10, Case No. 17-cv-159, C. D. CA.)
For more information about other class-action lawsuits regarding pricing discounts and TINA.org’s coverage of the issue, click here.
It’s a hot sponcon summer.
What’s this reservation good for?
TINA.org continues to support FTC, New York in federal court.
A bogus connection to major retailers is just the beginning.
Don’t pay for free online government forms.