Dick's Sporting Goods Customers Threaten Class Action Suit
- Thread starter Alabama Shooter
- Start date
gaseousclay
New member
neither do I. of course, there are grounds for suing depending on the case but we have become such a litigious society that it bothers me so many people are only out to make a quick buck rather than take responsibility for their own actions. the woman who sued McDonald's for burning herself with a hot cup of coffee comes to mind.
I also think we are overly litigious, but...
There is sometimes a legitimate reason for class action suits. Large corporations have lawyers on retainer or even as corporate employees, and they have funds for tort warfare.
A large corporation can alternately file for delay after delay, or can have its legal staff come up with a multitude of arguments and cites.
An individual or a small business, lacking these advantages, will go broke on billable hours for each delay and each counter-argument and supporting cite. This often results in individuals or small businesses not going to court, even when their case is strong or the large corporation's case is obviously flimsy.
For one example, a long-established Mom and Pop Cuban restaurant in Orlando, Restaurante Uno, changed its name to Restaurante Dos rather than fight the lawyers from Pizzeria Uno, who gave notice of intent to file for trademark infringement, when Pizzeria Uno decided to set up shop at Church Street.
Pizzeria Uno was able to win by bullying, when they should not have been able to prevail in court.
Had a bunch of restaurants, using Uno somewhere in their names, been able to band together, Pizzeria Uno might have actually had to prove a case - which I do not think they could have done.
So, the idea behind a legitimate class action suit is that it allows multiple Davids to stand against Goliath.
There is sometimes a legitimate reason for class action suits. Large corporations have lawyers on retainer or even as corporate employees, and they have funds for tort warfare.
A large corporation can alternately file for delay after delay, or can have its legal staff come up with a multitude of arguments and cites.
An individual or a small business, lacking these advantages, will go broke on billable hours for each delay and each counter-argument and supporting cite. This often results in individuals or small businesses not going to court, even when their case is strong or the large corporation's case is obviously flimsy.
For one example, a long-established Mom and Pop Cuban restaurant in Orlando, Restaurante Uno, changed its name to Restaurante Dos rather than fight the lawyers from Pizzeria Uno, who gave notice of intent to file for trademark infringement, when Pizzeria Uno decided to set up shop at Church Street.
Pizzeria Uno was able to win by bullying, when they should not have been able to prevail in court.
Had a bunch of restaurants, using Uno somewhere in their names, been able to band together, Pizzeria Uno might have actually had to prove a case - which I do not think they could have done.
So, the idea behind a legitimate class action suit is that it allows multiple Davids to stand against Goliath.
It's not at all uncommon for companies to take preorders on items that they're ultimately unable or unwilling to fulfill. Even if Dicks didn't have some kind of clause in the purchase agreement clarifying their right to cancel the order (I'd be extremely shocked if they didn't), I don't see how you'd possibly have a chance of winning. Maybe if you could show that Dick's was taking preorders knowing that they would never be fulfilled... but that's really a different situation than these complaints.
Look at it from a different POV:
Say that you need a tree removed from your yard. You hire Jimbo's lawn service to do the work next week and pay $100 up front. A few days later though Jimbo decides that he actually hates working on trees, tells you that he won't do the job and gives you your money back. Now you're looking at other services and can't find anything cheaper than $200. Do you have grounds to sue Jimbo? Frankly, I'd expect that case to be laughed out of court...
Now Troy Defense... they may very well have grounds to sue Dick's. Depending of course on the terms of their manufacturing contract.
Doc Intrepid
New member
The truth of the matter is that it's quite likely that by June or July, once the panic passes and prices drop back towards where they were last June or July, Dicks will be wanting to sell guns to customers.
If there is any cosmic justice, there will be a whole lot fewer buyers who buy guns from Dicks in the years to come.
Some folks have long memories.
If there is any cosmic justice, there will be a whole lot fewer buyers who buy guns from Dicks in the years to come.
Some folks have long memories.
The issue of damages on a contract for the sale of goods like firearms is governed by the Uniform Commercial Code. Damages for breach of contract for services is generally governed by common law.
Article 2-713 basically provides that if a seller wrongfully fails to deliver, the seller is liable for the difference in market price and contract price plus incidental and consequential damages:
Incidental damages includes things like additional shipping cots incurred, etc. Consequential losses are those suffered by the buyer which the seller had reason to know about when the contract was formed. http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/article2.htm#s2-715. There is no limit on consequential damages, though I can't see there being any here (the 10% limit would have to be set by contract and is usually referred to as liquidated damages).
Class action lawsuits can be a tremendous benefit to consumers and others who have not suffered a loss large enough to justify individual litigation. To qualify for class action status, there must be common questions of law and/or fact. Damages should ideally be the same or should be capable of ready calculation. Lawyers often stretch class actions to handle problems which were never originally intended to be litigated as class actions, IMO.
Without benefit of reading the terms of sale, I would think a class action would likely be successful against Dick's.
Article 2-713 basically provides that if a seller wrongfully fails to deliver, the seller is liable for the difference in market price and contract price plus incidental and consequential damages:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/article2.htm#s2-713. Please note that "wrongful" here does not mean ill-will or malice, only that the seller was not legally justified. Making a bad bargain is not legal justification for breaching a contract.
Incidental damages includes things like additional shipping cots incurred, etc. Consequential losses are those suffered by the buyer which the seller had reason to know about when the contract was formed. http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/2/article2.htm#s2-715. There is no limit on consequential damages, though I can't see there being any here (the 10% limit would have to be set by contract and is usually referred to as liquidated damages).
Class action lawsuits can be a tremendous benefit to consumers and others who have not suffered a loss large enough to justify individual litigation. To qualify for class action status, there must be common questions of law and/or fact. Damages should ideally be the same or should be capable of ready calculation. Lawyers often stretch class actions to handle problems which were never originally intended to be litigated as class actions, IMO.
Without benefit of reading the terms of sale, I would think a class action would likely be successful against Dick's.