This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Consumer Law
False Advertising
Toning Shoe Maker

Arianna Rosales, and Charlice Arnold, on behalf of themselves, all others similarly situated, and the general public v. Fitflop USA LLC

Published: Jan. 11, 2014 | Result Date: Dec. 19, 2013 | Filing Date: Jan. 1, 1900 |

Case number: 3:11-cv-00973-W-KSC Settlement –  $5,300,000

Court

USDC Southern District of California


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Patricia N. Syverson
(Bonnett, Fairbourn, Friedman & Balint PC)

Jayne A. Goldstein
(Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah LLP)

Karen M. Leser-Grenon

Joshua Keller

James C. Shah
(Miller Shah LLP)

Janine L. Pollack
(Calcaterra Pollack LLP)

Thomas J. O'Reardon II
(Blood, Hurst & O'Reardon LLP)

Timothy G Blood
(Blood Hurst & O'Reardon LLP)


Defendant

Brooke Alexander

Laura McKay

William Ohlemeyer


Facts

Arianna Rosales and Charlice Arnold filed a class action against FitFlop USA LLC on behalf of others similarly situated in connection with FitFlop's footwear. Plaintiffs sought monetary and injunctive relief.

Contentions

PLAINTIFFS' CONTENTIONS:
FitFlop advertised its footwear to aid in the strengthening or toning of muscles, reducing joint strain, burning calories, or assist in weight loss, or otherwise provide relief from medical conditions. However, plaintiff contended that these claims were false and misleading advertising, causing consumers to pay a premium on the footwear. Plaintiff alleged causes of action for violations of California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act, California's Unfair Competition Law, and breach of express warranty.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
FitFlop disputed plaintiff's allegations and maintains its advertising was substantiated by research conducted by two leading British universities.

Result

Following mediation, FitFlop agreed to settle the dispute by providing $5.3 million in settlement funds. FitFlop also agreed to stop making the alleged false and deceptive certain representations unless it has competent and scientific evidence that supports its claims so that they are true and not misleading. FitFlop admitted no liability as part of the settlement.


#100206

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email jeremy@reprintpros.com for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390