Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.
A woman can’t continue with her claims against exercise machine company Peloton because she’s suing under a New York-specific law when she lives in Michigan, a judge has ruled.
On Monday, a New York federal judge tossed Plaintiff Alicia Pearlman’s claims against Peloton Interactive Inc., which alleged she was eligible for damages under New York General Business Law (NYGBL) despite presumably purchasing her Peloton product in Michigan.
Pearlman was one of two plaintiffs in a class action lawsuit alleging Peloton violated the law by advertising an “ever-growing” library of online fitness classes when it recently had to remove more than half its content due to a copyright lawsuit.
However, U.S. District Judge Lewis J. Liman ruled Monday that Pearlman could no longer be part of the Peloton class action lawsuit because her amended complaint did not make an adequate case.
He said Pearlman had not proven that any of the transactions she made with Peloton took place in New York.
“Instead, Pearlman alleges that, when a member purchases Peloton hardware, a Membership or a Subscription, the payment is routed to Peloton’s bank accounts in New York,” he said.
“But that fact alone cannot support statutory standing. If it could, then any corporation holding a bank account in New York into which payments were received would be subject to liability under the NYGBL for activity anywhere in the world, which would expand the scope of the NYGBL far beyond the New York legislature’s intent.”
The judge also pointed out that Pearlman had still not noted what product she bought from Peloton. “Pearlman’s failure to correct this aspect of her complaint is puzzling, as this information is presumably readily accessible to her.”
The Peloton class action lawsuit will now move forward solely with its New York plaintiff, Eric Fishon.
Originally filed December 2019, the Peloton lawsuit alleges the company falsely advertised its range of exercise classes.
Peloton ran certain advertisements describing its library of fitness classes as “ever-growing,” the judge wrote. In April 2018, however, Peloton received a cease-and-desist letter from the National Music Publishers Association regarding Peloton’s use of songs in its on-demand class library.
In March 2019, several members of the NMPA filed a lawsuit against Peloton, seeking more than $150 million in damages, alleging that Peloton had been using musical works without proper licensing.
After removing the content, Peloton then faced more than 3,000 arbitration demands from confused customers, the class action says.
This is not the only class action Peloton is facing. In May, Peloton investors filed a class action lawsuit saying the company withheld information about the safety of its Tread+, leading to losses when consumers reported injuries, including the death of a child, due to the poor design of the now recalled exercise equipment.
Do you use a Peloton product? Let us know your experience in the comments!
The plaintiffs are represented by Greg G. Gutzler and Adam J. Levitt of DiCello Levitt Gutzler LLC; Ashley C. Keller and Benjamin J. Whiting of Keller Lenkner LLC, Adam Prom of Wexler Wallace LLP and Aaron M. Zigler of Zigler Law Group LLC.
The Peloton NYGBL Class Action Lawsuit is Fishon et al. v. Peloton Interactive Inc., Case No. 1:19-cv-11711, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.
Don’t Miss Out!
Check out our list of Class Action Lawsuits and Class Action Settlements you may qualify to join!
Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:
