Try our Advanced Search for more refined results

Midwestern Midget Football Club Inc. v. Riddell, Inc.

Track this case

Case Number:

2:15-cv-00244

Court:

West Virginia Southern

Nature of Suit:

Consumer Credit

Multi Party Litigation:

Class Action

Judge:

John T. Copenhaver, Jr.

Firms

  1. June 17, 2016

    Riddell Must Face Youth Football Helmet Suit, Judge Says

    Riddell Inc. can't escape a proposed class action brought by a youth football league accusing the sports equipment company of misleading consumers about the concussion-reduction benefits of its youth helmets because the claims are plausible, a West Virginia federal judge said Friday.

  2. February 17, 2016

    Riddell Wants De Facto Transfer, League Says

    A youth football league in a proposed class action accusing Riddell Inc. of misleading consumers about the concussion-reduction benefits of its youth helmets told a West Virginia court on Wednesday that the company first ignored discovery requests and is now trying to move discovery to New Jersey.

  3. January 27, 2016

    Riddell Withholding Docs In Youth Helmet Suit, League Says

    A youth football league in a proposed class action accusing Riddell Inc. of misleading consumers about the concussion reduction benefits of its youth helmets told a West Virginia court on Tuesday that the company has "flatly refused" to provide meaningful responses to its discovery requests.

  4. September 22, 2015

    Riddell Says League Can't Sue Over Youth Helmet Ads

    Riddell Inc. told a West Virginia federal court Monday to dismiss a proposed class action brought by a youth football league claiming the company misled consumers on the concussion reduction capabilities of its youth helmets, arguing the league failed to prove that a statement Riddell made was literally true.

  5. September 15, 2015

    Riddell's Own Ad Used As Weapon In Youth Helmet Suit

    A youth football league accusing Riddell Inc. of misleading consumers about the concussion reduction benefits of its helmets presented the company's own ad as evidence of why the case should go forward, in West Virginia federal court on Monday.

  6. September 04, 2015

    Riddell Moves To Toss New Complaint In Helmet Suit

    Riddell Inc. on Thursday mounted another dismissal bid in West Virginia federal court against the proposed class action accusing it of misleading consumers about the concussion safety benefits of its youth football helmets, saying that the plaintiffs' latest complaint changes the facts to suit the law.

  7. August 19, 2015

    Amended Riddell Helmet Suit Alleges Misleading Ads

    Plaintiffs in a proposed class action accusing Riddell Inc. of misleading consumers about the safety benefits of its youth football helmets revived their case in West Virginia federal court on Wednesday, saying the advertisements were misleading without claiming they were literally false.

  8. August 10, 2015

    Riddell Football Helmet Suit Nixed After 4th Circ. Ruling

    A West Virginia federal judge on Monday dismissed a proposed class action alleging Riddell Inc. misled consumers as to the concussion safety benefits of its youth football helmets, ruling that the plaintiffs cannot circumvent a recent Fourth Circuit decision by arguing the advertisements were true but nevertheless misleading.

  9. July 28, 2015

    Riddell Says Football Helmet Suit Doomed By 4th Circ. Ruling

    Riddell Inc. again blasted a proposed class action in West Virginia federal court alleging it misled consumers as to the concussion safety benefits of its youth football helmets arguing the plaintiff's cannot circumvent a recent Fourth Circuit decision by arguing the advertisements, based on a scientific study, were true but nevertheless misleading.

  10. July 17, 2015

    4th Circ. Ruling Doesn't Kill Riddell Helmet Row, Plaintiffs Say

    The plaintiffs in a proposed class action claiming sports equipment maker Riddell Inc. overcharged for football helmets in light of misleading advertisements asked a West Virginia federal court Wednesday to deny Ridell's motion to dismiss the case, arguing Ridell's arguments based on a recent Fourth Circuit ruling misinterpreted the ruling.