Overview
In an opinion Tuesday, Judge Marrero allowed a putative consumer fraud class action to proceed (in part) against Canada Goose. The plaintiff purchased a jacket that he claims was falsely marketed with a paper hang tag stating that the company supports the "ethical, responsible, and sustainable sourcing and use of real fur." Judge Marrero rejected the company's argument that these statements were "too general and subjective" to be actionable, and instead found that the allegations, though "thin," were enough to proceed beyond a motion to dismiss:
Though the allegations are thin, viewing the Complaint in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, the Court finds that the allegations support the reasonable inference that Canada Goose’s purported commitment to “ethical” fur sourcing is misleading because Canada Goose obtains fur from trappers who use allegedly inhumane leghold traps and snares. Plaintiff asserts that leghold traps “cause severe distress and injuries to animals,” including bone fractures, tendon and ligament damage, lost claws, dislocated joints, swelling, and hemorrhaging. Likewise, Plaintiff alleges that the use of snares is widely considered inhumane by industry professionals. These allegations make plausible the conclusion that leghold traps and snares are inhumane, and otherwise raise factual disputes not appropriate for resolution at this stage.
