TAMPA, Fla. (Legal Newsline) - A Florida federal judge has thrown out a class action brought by a hockey fan who complains the "authentic" jersey he bought wasn't exactly like the kinds worn by players on the ice.
Judge Virginia Hernandez Covington, in Tampa, threw out all seven of plaintiff David Inouye's claims but allowed him to try to refile six of them. Rather than do that, he and lawyer Will Wright of West Palm Beach filed their notice of voluntary dismissal on March 6.
"Notably, Mr. Inouye does not allege that he purchased the product from Adidas; rather, he alleges that he did so from third-party vendors such as Fanatics," the judge wrote.
"At no point in the complaint does Mr. Inouye detail how his purchases from Fanatics - and other unnamed third-party vendors - directly benefitted Adidas. Even assuming that Fanatics paid a portion of its revenues to Adidas, this would... indicate an indirect benefit 'at best.'"
The Florida case and a similar lawsuit brought in New York alleges several differences between the for-sale jersey and team jerseys.
The lawsuits say Adidas sold more jerseys at higher prices than it would have if it revealed the two types of jerseys were not exactly the same. Gripes begin with the so-called "fight strap" - an attachment that keeps the jersey from being pulled over the player's head during a fight.
"In the on-ice jersey, the fight strap contains a double layered reinforced base, while it is affixed through a single stitched layer in the authentic jersey sold to Plaintiff and consumers," the New York suit says.
They also complain that the fabric in authentic jerseys is half the thickness of on-ice jerseys and that the stitching is weaker and less durable. The Florida lawsuit says the for-sale jerseys are tighter and the neck hole is larger.
Also, the for-sale jerseys are made in Indonesia but NHL jerseys are made in Canada.
As for the word "authentic," Adidas says, as the official supplier for the NHL, all its jerseys are authentic.
"An officially licensed and manufactured product is, by definition, authentic," a motion to dismiss the New York suit says.
Judge Covington noted Florida plaintiff David Inouye alleged when he bought the jersey but not when or where he saw the alleged misrepresentations he relied upon when making the purchase.
"Importantly, because of this, Mr. Inouye has not sufficiently plead the 'causation' element of his (Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act) claim," her ruling says.
"While Mr. Inouye alleges that the misleading statements induced him to purchase the product, he does not allege with particularity that he was induced by the misleading statements of Adidas."
The case sought to certify a multi-state class of customers.