Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, ADVERTISING—N.Y. Sup.: Consumer action over Staples “easy rebates” dismissed, (Dec 18, 2013)

By Jody Coultas, J.D.

A consumer failed to state New York General Business Law (GBL) claims against Staples, Inc. for allegedly using misleading and deceptive advertising to lure customers to the store, a New York Supreme Court has held. The case was dismissed with prejudice (Readick v. Staples, Inc., December 12, 2013, Singh, A.).

The customer alleged that Staples misled consumers by falsely advertising discount rebate pricing. Staples allegedly inappropriately charges sales tax based on the full amount, rather than the actual, advertised price of the item, failed to clearly and conspicuously state that the discounted prices required a mail-in rebate, and deliberately deceived consumers by using the confusing term “easy rebate” instead of the term “mail in” rebate in its advertisements.

Section 349(a) of the GBL prohibits deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any business, trade, or commerce or in the furnishing of any service in this state.” Section 350 makes it unlawful to use false advertising.

The court found that nothing about the advertisement was misleading or deceptive. Consumers had an opportunity to learn about the rebate structure before going to a store since the weekly ads were posted on the company’s website. Also, the “easy rebate” language was explained in clearly legible typeface in printed advertisements. Staples did not try to hide anything from consumers.

The case is No. 650174/13.

Attorneys: (McCullough Ginsberg Montano & Partners, LLP) for Jodd Readick. (Thompson Hine LLP) for Staples Inc.

Companies: Staples, Inc.

Cases: StateUnfairTradePractices Advertising NewYorkNews