There Should Be a Price to Pay for Knowingly Lying to Consumers
Why TINA.org wants the Supreme Court to address proof of harm in Lanham Act cases.
October 2018: This case was dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled., the reasons for which have not been disclosed.
July 2017: This case was transferred to another New York court. (Case No. 17-cv-5723, S. D. NY.)
March 2017: A class-action lawsuit was filed regarding the allegedly deceptive pricing practices of AppleBee’s restaurants in Times Square and on Broadway in New York City. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the restaurants advertise a low price on their menus without adequately disclosing a hidden mandatory surcharge of 15% percent at the Broadway restaurant and 18% at the Times Square restaurant. (Ghee et al v. Apple-Metro, Inc., 42nd Apple, LLC d/b/a AppleBee’s Neighborhood Grill & Bar, Broadway Apple, LLC d/b/a AppleBee’s Neighborhood Grill & Bar, Case No. 17-cv-1554, E. D. NY.)
For more information about other class-action lawsuits regarding pricing and TINA.org’s coverage of the issue, click here.
Why TINA.org wants the Supreme Court to address proof of harm in Lanham Act cases.
Letters alert agencies and organizations to company’s improper marketing.
TINA.org discovers some roadblocks to unlocking this purportedly free offer.
New research points to “no.”
Why disclosures are key to protecting informed consumer choice and competition.