Antitrust Law Daily Wrap Up, STATE UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES—DMinn: Vendor’s Deceptive Trade Practices Claims Against Target Dismissed , (Oct 17, 2012)
Organizations Mentioned:Faegre Baker Daniels, LLP
By Jody Coultas, J.D.
The federal district court in St. Paul, Minnesota dismissed a number of claims, including a Minnesota Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act (MDTPA) claim, against Target Corporation filed by former vendor JLR Gear after the business relationship was terminated (National Broom Company of California d/b/a JLR Gear v. Target Corp., October 12, 2012, Kyle, R.).
As part of its safety testing and approval process, Target required the products it sold to undergo an extraction test to ensure its safety in food preparation. One of JLR Gear’s basting brushes failed the test and Target declined to order retesting. Another product could not be tested because a security seal had been broken. Both products later passed retesting. Target terminated the relationship and allegedly continued to make disparaging statements about JLR Gear concerning the failed tests.
The court dismissed the MDTPA claim for failure to state a claim. JLR Gear alleged that Target’s allegedly disparaging statements violated the MDTPA and sought monetary relief. Injunctive relief is the only available remedy for deceptive trade practices. Even if JLR Gear could prove its MDTPA claim, the court could not grant relief because JLR Gear failed to seek injunctive relief or allege any ongoing violations or future harm.
JLR Gear also failed to state claims for product disparagement or business defamation, according to the court. To establish product disparagement, the statement at issue must be false and disparaging of the products, causing special damages. Business defamation is shown by a false and defamatory statement made to a third party that harmed JLR Gear’s reputation. Target’s statements stated that the brushes failed a test were not false. The statements concerning JLR Gear’s supervision and management of its facilities and quality control were not specific enough or verifiable to be proven false.
The case is No. 12-1201 (RHK/TNL).
George E. Antrim, III (George E. Antrim, III, PLLC) for National Broom Company of California d/b/a JLR Gear. Michael A. Ponto (Faegre Baker Daniels LLP) for Target Corpration.
Cases: StateUnfairTradePractices MinnesotaNews