We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 2,571

Advertising Law Snapshots, Volume 1, Issue 9
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • May 3 2016

Defendant made packaging claims about the thickness of its product as compared to the plaintiff Claims were "false by necessary implication" such


California DAs Put the Brakes on Uber With $25M Fine
  • Manatt Phelps & Phillips LLP
  • USA
  • April 25 2016

To settle allegations of deceptive advertising and unlawful business practices in violation of California's consumer protection laws, Uber has agreed


J Crew Hit With Class Action over Online Factory Store Prices
  • Arent Fox LLP
  • USA
  • April 21 2016

J Crew Group Inc. was recently hit with a nationwide class action lawsuit alleging that the clothing retailer offers fictitious sales on the J Crew


Consumer Protection in Retail: Weekly Roundup
  • Hunton & Williams LLP
  • USA
  • April 19 2016

This past week, the following consumer protection actions made headlines: FTC Reminds Consumers to Watch for Misleading Sales; Warns Retailers of the


Practical Guidelines for Retailers Seeking to Avoid E-Commerce Marketing Class Actions
  • Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP
  • USA
  • April 11 2016

Everyone loves a good dealespecially one discovered from the comfort of their own home. It comes as no surprise, then, that retailers that have seen


Sixth Circuit clarifies CAFA removal rules in favor of defendants
  • Bricker & Eckler LLP
  • USA
  • April 7 2016

On April 7, the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit issued a decision clarifying the rules governing the timing of removal of cases


California Court Nixes Class Action Regarding Gap Factory Stores
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • April 4 2016

A class action lawsuit was recently filed against Gap Inc. alleging that Gap violated California consumer laws by misleadingly suggesting that the


The State AG Report Weekly Update April 1, 2016
  • Cozen O'Connor
  • USA
  • April 1 2016

The Federal Trade Commission and Attorneys General, as well as other law enforcement personnel from 50 states and the District of Columbia, reached a


Fourth Circuit Extends Section 43(a) Lanham Act Standing to Companies Not Selling Their Product or Using Their Mark in the U.S.
  • Proskauer Rose LLP
  • USA
  • March 31 2016

Last week, an appellate court held that a plaintiff has standing to bring a false association and false advertising claim under Section 43(a) of the


Revamping the Runway-to-Retail Model
  • Goulston & Storrs PC
  • USA
  • March 30 2016

With the increase in digital coverage of Fashion Week, from live streams to Snapchat stories and Instagram postings, designers have put what might be