Fans of perplexing damages calculations will enjoy the proposed class action suit filed in federal court recently against Universal City Studios for an allegedly misleading film trailer.
The complaint notes that an actress the plaintiffs liked, Ana De Armas, was in the trailer for "Yesterday" but didn’t show up in the movie. Hence, the suit said, they each lost $3.99 and “suffered injury-in-fact.” Did they?
I suppose it’s possible someone watched this movie only because of the promise of Ana De Armas — but they still got to watch a movie. Was there emotional distress? Were the plaintiffs worried about what happened to Ana? Was this a cynical bait and switch?
This is what the suit says: “Because consumers were not provided with the movie product that they were promised by the 'Yesterday' movie trailer, they were effectively provided with no value at all.”
0 Comments