Judge Thomas S. Zilly, of the Western District of Washington, denied defendant’s motion to dismiss the putative class action.
Background. Washington residents alleged that Vineyard Vines sent commercial emails with subject lines such as “LAST DAY!” and “ENDS TONIGHT” even when the promotion continued or was extended. They also challenged subject lines stating “30% Off EVERYTHING” where the offer required a $150 minimum purchase. Plaintiffs sued under Washington’s Commercial Electronic Mail Act and Consumer Protection Act, alleging that Vineyard knew or should have known the recipients were Washington residents. Vineyard moved to dismiss and separately moved to strike materials concerning another CEMA challenge.
The Court’s Analysis. The court held that CEMA’s prohibition on false or misleading information in a commercial email’s subject line falls within CAN-SPAM’s express savings clause for state laws addressing falsity or deception. Under Washington law, the subject line is evaluated on its own; the body of the email cannot cure a false subject line. The court distinguished actionable representations of fact—such as a promotion’s duration, availability, terms, and price—from nonactionable puffery such as “Best Deals of the Year.” The allegations that Vineyard created urgency about sales it knew would continue, and advertised an unqualified discount subject to a minimum purchase, plausibly stated CEMA and CPA claims. The motion to dismiss was denied, although the motion to strike was granted.
Significance. Under CEMA, CAN-SPAM does not insulate promotional subject lines that contain material factual misrepresentations. Retailers should validate urgency claims, offer duration, discount conditions, and price qualifications in the subject line itself, rather than relying on clarifying language in the email body.
Harrington v. Vineyard Vines, LLC, 813 F. Supp. 3d 1218 (W.D. Wash. 2025), reconsideration denied, No. C25-1115 TSZ, 2026 WL 125134 (W.D. Wash. Jan. 16, 2026).
