Joybird class action lawsuit overview:
- Who: Three consumers filed a class action lawsuit against Stitch Industries Inc., doing business as Joybird.
- Why: The plaintiffs allege Joybird falsely advertises perpetual discounts on its furniture products.
- Where: The Joybird class action lawsuit was filed in California federal court.
- How to get help: If you purchased discounted furniture or other home goods from Bassett or Joybird while you were in California, Oregon or Washington, you may qualify to join a class action lawsuit investigation.
Joybird is facing a class action lawsuit alleging it falsely advertises perpetual discounts on its furniture products, deceiving consumers into believing they are getting a special bargain.
Joybird, a direct-to-consumer manufacturer and e-commerce retailer of upholstered furniture, advertises discounts of 30% to 50% off on all its products, according to the class action lawsuit.
The plaintiffs allege these discounts are taken from inflated and self-created strikethrough reference prices, which Joybird represents as the regular and normal prices of the products.
However, the plaintiffs argue that the products are never or almost never offered at the supposed regular price and that the discounts are never-ending.
“Joybird’s intent is to trick consumers into believing that its products are worth, and have a market value equal to, the inflated reference price, and that the lower advertised sale price represents a special bargain,” the Joybird class action lawsuit says.
Joybird’s false discount advertising scheme harms consumers like the plaintiffs by causing them to pay more than they otherwise would have paid and to buy products that they otherwise would not have bought, the plaintiffs allege.
Joybird perpetually advertises discounts, plaintiffs say
The class action lawsuit alleges that Joybird’s false discount advertising is so pervasive across all of its products and advertising that it is apparent the heart of Joybird’s marketing plan is to deceive the public.
The plaintiffs argue Joybird’s false discount advertising violates California’s Consumers Legal Remedies Act, False Advertising Law and Unfair Competition Law.
The plaintiffs are suing individually and on behalf of a class of consumers in the United States other than those residing in California, Oregon or Washington State who purchased from the Joybird website or a Joybird retail store one or more products advertised with a discount.
They seek restitution and/or disgorgement for themselves and for each of the class members as well as public injunctive relief to protect the general public by enjoining Joybird from engaging in the unlawful false discount advertising scheme alleged in the complaint.
Last year, Joybird agreed to a $7.15 million settlement resolving claims it deceptively advertised discounts on its website and in stores, benefiting consumers in California, Oregon and Washington.
What do you think of the allegations made in this Joybird class action lawsuit? Let us know in the comments.
The plaintiffs are represented by Daniel M. Hattis of Hattis Lukacs & Corrington.
The Joybird class action lawsuit is German, et al. v. Stitch Industries Inc., Case No. 2:26-cv-01820, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.
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:
- Another Novo Nordisk class action alleges Ozempic caused vision loss
- Lyft ordered to produce driver records in Uber sexual assault MDL
- Trader Joe’s and Ajinomoto Foods recall frozen chicken fried rice due to glass contamination
- Meta class action alleges $500M stock pump-and-dump scheme using scam ads
