Saying no reasonable consumer would regard Menards’ descriptions of its lumber the way plaintiffs Michael Fuchs and Vladislav Krasilnikov said they did, the judge last week dismissed the would-be class action lawsuit against the Wisconsin-based home-improvement chain.
2 comments:
The fact that this lawsuit made its way all the way to a federal level in court is absolutely astounding. Though it may be confusing to laypeople, the nominal vs dimensional naming system for lumber is so well established as a norm that even the US Department of Commerce; The system is ubiquitous across the United States. Part of working on any type of project is doing research beforehand to ensure that one knows what they are doing. As such, the guys that filed this lawsuit have absolutely ZERO ground to stand on, as they failed to do their homework. I have no pity for people who act belligerently out of ignorance. Sure, the naming can be a bit confusing and esoteric, but that is really no excuse when you can literally see the product you are buying.
I’ve been following these stories for a while now. I remember when the first lawsuit came out against Lowes for selling 2x4 that wasn’t 2”x4”. While I think it is ridiculous to have this lawsuit, I believe it should have been thrown out for other reasons. The court claimed that any “reasonable consumer” would know that a 4x4 is not 4x4 but I disagree. I think a reasonable consumer at a big box store might not have the experience to know the actual dimensions of a 2x4. Why I believe it should be thrown out is for intent. Menards had no intention to deceive. The fact of the matter is a piece of wood that is 3.5”x3.5” is called a 4x4. According to the government a 4x4 is defined as 3.5x3.5 so while it is misleading to see on a sign, a customer would wither know what a 4x4 is or have the resources to check. But I do not think an average reasonable customer would know what a 4x4 really is but it is in their best interest to find out.
Post a Comment