Class Action Lawsuit Against BJ's Wholesale Faces Setback in Florida Appellate Court
Florida's Third District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded a lower court's certification of a class seeking injunctive relief in an unfair and deceptive trade practices action against BJ's Wholesale Club Inc.
May 09, 2019 at 06:54 PM
4 minute read
Florida's Third District Court of Appeal has issued a favorable ruling to a wholesale discount chain looking to circumvent a class action lawsuit.
An opinion entered by the appellate court Wednesday reversed and remanded a May 2017 order by Miami-Dade Circuit Judge John Thornton granting class certification to Laura Bugliaro, a Florida woman pursuing a deceptive and unfair trade practices claim against BJ's Wholesale Club Inc.
“We reverse and remand the order granting class certification because … the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction, as Bugliaro failed to exhaust her administrative remedies, and … the class is not ascertainable,” the order said. The panel's opinion consolidated appeals from the defendant as well as the Florida Department of Revenue.
Bugliaro filed her initial complaint against BJ's in March 2015. She alleged the members-only warehouse business had been “improperly receiving and retaining money from its Florida customers under the guise of collecting Florida sales tax on sales amounts that are not properly taxable.”
“Florida law requires dealer retailers like BJ's to collect sales tax on only the discounted price of an item after the application of a discount issued by the dealer, as opposed to collecting sales on the item's full, undiscounted price,” the complaint said. Bugliaro accused the company of collecting on the full sales tax of purportedly discounted items bought by BJ's customers in Florida. It also contended “the additional money that BJ's improperly takes from its customers … is not actually sales tax at all, and therefore does not have to be remitted to the state.”
Read the appellate court's order:
An answer to the complaint filed by the defendant denied the charges and asserted BJ's does remit all sales tax to the state.
“BJ's admits only that plaintiff filed this action seeking refund of sales tax,” the filing said. “After reasonable investigation, BJ's lacks knowledge or information regarding other unidentified transactions by other customers and it is unclear how plaintiff is defining 'discounts provided by BJ's.'”
The appellate opinion issued Wednesday held the lower court lacked jurisdiction in part because the plaintiff and prospective class members were seeking damages in addition to injunctive relief.
“Because Count I includes a request for a refund, Bugliaro and any putative class members were required to exhaust their administrative remedies with the Department of Revenue,” the order said, noting the plaintiff had not taken the matter up with the agency before filing the complaint.
The order also ruled the outlined class was ill-defined in its present iteration.
“The tax issue in this case only affects the stores in Florida. However, BJ's has nationwide membership where potentially any member in the nation could travel to Florida and shop at any one of BJ's 31 Florida locations,” the opinion said. “Because BJ's members are not members of particular stores, the reference to 'members of BJ's Wholesale Club's 31 Florida stores' encompasses either every current and future BJ's member nationwide, or the definition does not include anyone, as membership is not limited by state.”
The appellate court added, “Based on the definition of the class, we find that the class is not ascertainable because it has not been defined in such a way that the members of that class can be properly notified of the class action and their right to opt out.”
The Florida Attorney General's Office, which represented the Department of Revenue, referred press inquiries to be directed to their client, but the agency did not respond by press time.
Steve Silverman, a founding member of the Kluger, Kaplan, Silverman, Katzen & Levine law firm and one of Bugliaro's attorneys, remained hopeful about his client's case.
“We believe the Third District's opinion provides a road map for us to be able to protect Florida consumers prospectively with an injunctive class to stop BJ's abusive and deceptive taxing practices for in store purchases made by BJ's customers,” he said.
The Foley & Lardner attorneys representing BJ's did not return requests for comment by press time.
Related stories:
Class Action Claims BJ's Overcharges on Sales Tax
Judge OKs Sales Tax Class Action Against BJ's Wholesale Club
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPlaintiffs Attorneys Awarded $113K on $1 Judgment in Noise Ordinance Dispute
4 minute readUS Judge Cannon Blocks DOJ From Releasing Final Report in Trump Documents Probe
3 minute readRead the Document: DOJ Releases Ex-Special Counsel's Report Explaining Trump Prosecutions
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1A Time for Action: Attorneys Must Answer MLK's Call to Defend Bar Associations and Stand for DEI Initiatives in 2025
- 2How I Made Managing Partner: 'Be the Uniting Voice of the Firm,' Says George Ogilvie of McDonald Carano
- 3People in the News—Jan. 31, 2025—Eastburn and Gray, Fox Rothschild
- 4Exits Leave American Airlines, SiriusXM, Spotify Searching for New Legal Chiefs
- 5Etsy App Infringes on Storage, Retrieval Patents, New Suit Claims
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250