Planet Fitness Seeks To Uphold Dismissed Claims in Class Action

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.

Planet Fitness is opposing a plaintiff’s motion to reconsider the dismissal of several claims in a class action lawsuit alleging the fitness chain fails to state total payment obligations in members’ contracts and violates various state consumer protection laws.

The opposition brief presented before U.S. District Court Judge Freda L. Wolfson on Tuesday urges the Court to uphold its decision to dismiss the majority of claims brought by plaintiff Marni Truglio.

Truglio filed the proposed class action in New Jersey Superior Court last September, arguing that Planet Fitness failed to clearly state the full cost of canceling membership, entitling her and the proposed Class to damages based on violations of the Health Club Services Act, the Consumer Fraud Act and the Truth in Consumer Contract, Warranty and Notice Act.

The case was subsequently removed to New Jersey federal Court in November.

Last month, Judge Wolfson tossed many of the claims in Truglio’s putative class action lawsuit against Planet Fitness, including alleged violations of the New Jersey’s Health Club Services Act and Consumer Fraud Act, stating that Truglio failed to to plead an “ascertainable loss” and that the membership agreement does not “expressly” obligate Truglio to renew her contract under the HCSA.

However, Truglio fought back in an amended complaint, pleading with the Court to reconsider its dismissal of these claims under New Jersey’s Truth-in-Consumer Contract, Warranty and Notice Act (TCCWNA).

Truglio argued that the Membership Agreement’s failure to conspicuously set forth total payment obligations is not an “omission” and therefore should not be dismissed.

But Planet Fitness says this is incorrect and that reconsideration is not warranted, stating that Truglio failed to identify any deficiency in the Court’s decision.

“Plaintiff’s circle of obfuscation falls well short of establishing a clear error or any basis to believe manifest injustice will result if the motion is denied,” Planet Fitness said in the memorandum. “Moreover, had her ‘premised on’ theory had any weight (which we submit it does not), plaintiff could have included it in earlier briefing to this Court. She did not.”

Truglio asserts that Planet Fitness’ alleged violation of the HCSA is not the “mere omission” of a required contractual term, but rather a violation that is “premised on” included provisions, stating that this a confusingly worded portion of the Planet Fitness Membership Agreement.

Specifically, Truglio argues that Planet Fitness is in violation of the HCSA because it fails to plainly state a member’s full obligation.

“Plaintiff sets forth no new facts or law to justify her position and does not identify the ‘language and numerical values’ on which the alleged violation is based,” Planet Fitness argued back. “More fundamentally, plaintiff offers no legal or logical support for the alchemic proposition that the absence of the total payment obligation is somehow not an omission.”

Truglio seeks to represent a Class of consumers who joined any one of the 40 New Jersey Planet Fitness locations over the six years before she filed her proposed class action lawsuit on Sept. 28, as well as a subclass of those who attempted to cancel their contracts and were charged additional monthly payments after they did so.

Having dismissed the lion’s share of Truglio’s claims, Judge Wolfson raised concerns about whether there would be enough potential plaintiffs to certify a class action lawsuit and whether the claims would exceed the $5 million ceiling to stay in federal court.

Truglio is represented by Joseph K. Jones and Benjamin J. Wolf of the Law Offices of Joseph K. Jones.

The Planet Fitness Membership Agreement Class Action Lawsuit is Truglio v. Planet Fitness Inc., et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-07959, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.