QVC must face fraud and antitrust claims by actress Suzanne Somers, who claims the at-home shopping company used catch-and-kill tactics to favor another dietary supplement over hers, a Philadelphia federal judge ruled.
The lawsuit accuses QVC of agreeing to sell supplements made by Somers’ company SLC Sweet, then finding pretexts to reject purchase orders because it had an exclusive deal with an SLC competitor.
Somers, the former star of the TV sitcoms “Three’s Company” and “Step By Step,” filed the case in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
Originally, actress Suzanne Somers filed suit against QVC alleging it lured her into a deal as an attempt to remove her from the dietary supplement business and market its own supplement brands.
According to the civil action filed October 15 in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Suzanne Somers and SLC Sweet alleged breach of contract, violation of the Uniform Commercial Code, California’s Business and Professions Code, promissory estoppel, intentional interference with contractual relations, and violations of the Sherman Act against QVC.
The plaintiffs claim they were lured away from selling their products through the home shopping retailer Evine and asked to enter into a form purchase order agreement with QVC – all while a merger between QVC and HSN appeared to already be in the works. The suit states HSN already had a dietary supplement brand partner, Andrew Lessman.
Full Content: Legal News Line
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
CVS Health Explores Potential Breakup Amid Investor Pressure: Report
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
DirecTV Acquires Dish TV, Creating 20 Million-Subscriber Powerhouse
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
South Korea Fines Kakao Mobility $54.8 Million for Anti-Competitive Practices
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
Google Offers Settlement in India’s Antitrust Case Regarding Smart TVs
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
Attorney Challenges NCAA’s $2.78 Billion Settlement in Landmark Antitrust Cases
Oct 3, 2024 by
nhoch@pymnts.com
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh