
Deceptive Marketing by Rihanna’s Savage X Fenty Put to Bed in California
Lingerie company agrees to pay $1.2 million to settle lawsuit
Sliwa et al. v. Sezzle Inc.
22-cv-3055, C.D. Cal.
(May 2022)
Sliwa et al. v. Sezzle Inc.
22-cv-6093, C.D. Cal.
(July 2022)
Sezzle’s Buy Now, Pay Later services
Misleadingly marketing that Sezzle is a free service with no fees, interest or other catches without adequately warning users of the risk that banks processing Sezzle payments will charge them multiple overdraft fees
Sliwa Case (No. 22-cv-3055): Voluntarily dismissed When a complaint is dismissed without prejudice, an amended version of the complaint can be refiled.
Sliwa Case (No. 22-cv-6093): Settled
(Voluntarily dismissed When a complaint is dismissed with prejudice, it cannot be refiled.)
Lingerie company agrees to pay $1.2 million to settle lawsuit
Unearthing the fees that Fisher charges but doesn’t disclose in some of its TV ads.
The deadline to submit a comment on the agency’s new proposed definition is Feb. 16.
Think twice before sticking nonstick cooking pans in the dishwasher.
This crypto scam has cost hundreds of people thousands of dollars.