From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Taylor v. BMG Direct Marketing, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 12, 2002
299 A.D.2d 181 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)

Opinion

2158

November 12, 2002.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered August 1, 2001, which, upon the prior grant of defendant's motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), dismissed the complaint alleging deceptive acts and practices in violation of General Business Law § 349, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

BARRY A. WEPRIN, for plaintiff-appellant.

STEVEN M. HAYES, for defendant-respondent.

Before: Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Saxe, Marlow, JJ.


Plaintiff's allegations, that defendant's fully disclosed shipping and handling charges are deceptive and misleading because they exceed defendant's actual costs, manifestly fail to state any cognizable claim since they are indistinguishable from those already determined to be insufficient to state a cause of action in Zuckerman v. BMG Direct Mktg., Inc. ( 290 A.D.2d 330, lv denied 98 N.Y.2d 602). There, we held that "a disclosure that a specified amount will be charged for shipping and handling cannot cause a reasonable consumer to believe that such an amount necessarily is equal to or less than the seller's actual shipping and handling costs" (Id. at 330-331; see also Sands v. Ticketmaster-New York, 207 A.D.2d 687, lv dismissed in part and denied in part 85 N.Y.2d 904).

We have considered and found unavailing plaintiff's remaining arguments, including the contention that defendant's use of the word "free" is deceptive and violates the Federal Trade Commission's "Guide Concerning Use of the Word 'FREE' and Similar Representations" ( 16 C.F.R. § 251.1). Defendant complied with the Federal Trade Commission rules and regulations by disclosing its shipping and handling fees, clearly and conspicuously, at the outset of the offer, as well as in its Membership Guide, thus apprising customers of such fees before they become obligated to accept any shipment or make payment.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Taylor v. BMG Direct Marketing, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Nov 12, 2002
299 A.D.2d 181 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
Case details for

Taylor v. BMG Direct Marketing, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:GERALD J. TAYLOR, ETC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. BMG DIRECT MARKETING…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Nov 12, 2002

Citations

299 A.D.2d 181 (N.Y. App. Div. 2002)
749 N.Y.S.2d 31

Citing Cases

Siegel v. Landy

The Supreme Court properly dismissed, insofar as asserted against David Landy and David Landy, ASID…

Appert v. Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, Inc.

In an action alleging deceptive acts and practices, the New York appellate court found no cause of action…