Macy's wonders how plaintiffs figured out thread count of sheets was inaccurate

By Amanda Thomas | May 22, 2018

Courtesy of Macy's

CINCINNATI (Legal Newsline) – Macy’s Inc. has filed a motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by two customers who allege the thread count of the bedding they purchased from the store was less than what was advertised.

Macy’s filed the motion Jan. 2 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio asking Judge Timothy S. Black to dismiss the suit in its entirety. 

Sara Hawes and Amy Hill, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, filed a complaint in November 2017 against Macy’s, AQ Textiles LLC, Creative Textiles Mills PVT LTD and John Doe Corporations (1-100). The defendants are alleged to have violated the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and Missouri Merchandising Practices Act. According to the motion, AQ Textiles imports and distributes bedding products to Macy’s. 

The plaintiffs claim the defendants' representations allegedly were passed onto customers through the Macy's website and in its retail stores.

Beth A. Bryan   https://www.taftlaw.com/people/beth-a-bryan

The customers allege that AQ and Creative Textile Mills “made false written representations as to the thread count of their sheets and bedding products, at least, on product packaging.” They also allege that the defendants improperly inflated thread counts on their bedding and linen products. Hill and Hawes claims the two separate sheets they bought in California were represented to be 1,000 thread count and 900 thread count respectively. Hawes alleges that the actual thread count of the sheets she purchased was 249.

The motion notes that the plaintiffs never identified how they determined that the thread count was inaccurate “or whether the sheets turned out to be uncomfortable, of poor quality, or unsuitable for use as bedsheets.”

The plaintiffs are requesting a trial by jury and are asking for actual, compensatory and exemplary damages. They are also asking for the defendants to issue corrective advertising. 

In its motion to dismiss, Macy’s said the plaintiff’s class action claims “must be dismissed for lack of standing” because they are based on products the plaintiffs didn’t actually purchase. The company also argues the claims must be dismissed for failure to state a claim. 

The defendants are represented by Beth A. Bryan, John A. Nalbandian and Beth A. Bryan of Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP; and Reid L. Phillips, Jennifer K. Van Zant, Andrew L. Rodenbough, and Ryan C. Fairchild of Brooks, Pierce, McLendon, Humphrey & Leonard LLP.

Want to get notified whenever we write about Macy's ?

Sign-up Next time we write about Macy's, we'll email you a link to the story. You may edit your settings or unsubscribe at any time.

Organizations in this Story


More News

The Record Network