“Made In the USA” Claim is False and Misleading, Say Purchasers of Sears Craftsman Tools |
 |
 |
|
|
Though it can legitimately claim status as an American institution, verteran department store and catalog retailer Sears Roebuck & Co. may be waving the flag too vigourously in efforts to boost sales of its popular Craftman Tools line. A class action have benn filed on behalf of several tool buyers who allege that Sears conducted false advertising and consumer fraud by proclaiming that its Craftsman tool line is "Made in the USA." The suit alleges that promotions in ads, the Sears website, on signs and labels that Craftsman is "Made in the USA" led consumers to purchase the tools out of a sense of patriotism. Consumers were also led to believe that Craftsman is of high quality because it is "Made in the USA." Pictures attached to the complaint clearly show metal parts from Austria, Denmark, China, India and Mexico on Craftsman tools boldly labeled as "Made in the USA."
"Craftsman and Sears enjoy the goodwill of American consumers who have been led to believe Craftsman is 'Made in the U.S.A.' Sears has falsely touted Craftsman tools as 'Made in the USA' when the Federal Trade Commission has issued guidelines stating that such a claim is proper only where all or substantially all of the product is U.S.A. made. Sears Craftsman is misleading consumers by invoking that claim," said Barbara J. Hart, attorney for the tool buyers. The suit seeks financial and other damages on behalf of the class.
At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and
settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and
other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints.
Other Consumer Products Cases of Interest
The California State Court of Appeals in Los Angeles has overturned a putative class action lawsuit brought against Pfizer’s Listerine brand, which claimed that the mouthwash was misleadingly advertised as “as effective as floss.” The court ordered that class status be denied and remanded the case back to the trial court. The judges’ decision makes it complicated for the case to proceed, as there is only one named plaintiff who bought Listerine.
The ruling, handed down July 11, is potentially significant because it weakens the ability of lawyers to create class-action suits based on false advertising claims.
Several class actions have been filed against Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, Inc. (NYSE:KKD) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between August 21, 2003, and May 7, 2004. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. Several class actions have been filed against home appliance manufacturer Salton, Inc. (NYSE:SFP) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between November 11, 2002, and May 11, 2004. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. A new lawsuit filed by New York attorneys against publisher Take Two Interactive is seeking class action status. The lawsuit is on behalf of purchasers of Grand Theft Auto San Andreas over the 'Hot Coffee' scandal. Florence Cohen says she bought the video game Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas for her 14-year-old grandson without knowing it contained hidden, sexually explicit scenes at a time when the controversial game was rated M (Mature), for gamers 17 years and over. Her suit is reported to be "on behalf of consumers nationwide".
The class has been certified in numerous consolidated class actions filed against clothier Abercrombie & Fitch Company (NYSE:ANF) and certain of its officers and directors by stockholders who purchased the company's common stock between October 8, 1999, and October 13, 1999. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by issuing a series of material misrepresentations to the market over this time period, thereby artificially inflating the price of the company's securities. The parties have reached a final $10.7 million settlement in several actions filed against online flower delivery business FTD.Com, Inc. and its parent, IOS Brands Corporation, by stockholders who purchased FTD.Com class A common stock between March 1, 2002, and June 27, 2002. The actions claim that the defendants violated federal securities laws by breaching their fiduciary duties in conjunction with the companies’ 2002 reorganization. Persons eligible to take part in the settlement must submit proof of claims forms postmarked no later than May 13, 2004.
|