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.

Torts
Business
Automatic Renewal Law

People of the State of California v. NakedWines.com Inc.

Published: Mar. 17, 2023 | Result Date: Oct. 6, 2022 | Filing Date: Sep. 28, 2022 |

Case number: 37-2022-00039354-CU-BT-CTL Settlement –  $650,000

Judge

Timothy B. Taylor

Court

San Diego County Superior Court


Attorneys

Plaintiff

Stephen M. Spinella
(Office of the San Diego District Attorney)

Nancy E. O'Malley
(Alameda Count)

Stephanie A. Bridgett
(Office of Shasta County District Attorney)

Jill R. Ravitch
(Office of the Sonoma County District Attorney)

Jennifer A. Haley
(Office of Napa District Attorney)


Defendant

Anne E. Huffsmith
(NakeWines.com Inc.)


Facts

Nakedwines.com, Inc. is one of the largest online retail sellers of wine in the United States. As part of its business, Nakedwines offered consumers an opportunity to enroll in its "Wine Angel" and "Wine Genie" programs. The Wine Angel program was a monthly subscription that charged consumers $40 per month that they could use to purchase select wines from Nakedwines's website. The Wine Genie program was an automatically renewing monthly subscription that provided consumers with shipments of pre-selected wines. In September 2022, the Alameda, Napa, San Diego, Shasta, and Sonoma County District Attorneys filed suit against Nakedwines in San Diego County Superior Court.

Contentions

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff contended that the enrollment process for the defendant's Wine Angel and Wine Genie programs failed to include required prepurchase disclosures about automatically recurring charges; that defendant's post-purchase acknowledgments of these automatically recurring charges were insufficient; and that the defendant failed to provide a simple online method for customers to cancel their subscription and stop payments. Plaintiff contended the defendant's failures were violations of the Automatic Renewal Law.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS: Defendant denied any wrongdoing or liability.

Result

The parties reached a settlement agreement wherein the defendant agreed to pay $650,000 and to update and improve its sign-up process and disclosures to settle plaintiff's claims.


#140416

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

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