Case 3:19-cv-00201-L Document 1 Filed 01/25/19 Page 1 of 12 PageID 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

KEVIN B. BRASHEAR, CIVIL ACTION NO. __________

VERSUS MAG. JUDGE _______________

PANINI AMERICA, INC.

COMPLAINT - CLASS ACTION

NOW INTO COURT, through undersigned counsel, comes plaintiff, KEVIN B.

BRASHEAR, individually and on behalf of similarly situated individuals (hereinafter plaintiff

and/or “class representative”), being of the full age of majority, domiciled in Dallas County, State

of Texas, who files this claim individually and as representative of all others similarly situated,

respectfully alleges as follows:

I.

PARTIES

1.

The Class Representative is KEVIN B. BRASHEAR, an individual of the full age of

majority, domiciled in Dallas County, State of Texas.

2.

Made defendant herein is PANINI AMERICA, INC., (hereinafter “Panini”) a Texas

corporation with its principal place of business in Irving, Texas and doing business within the State

of Texas and the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court.

1
 Case 3:19-cv-00201-L Document 1 Filed 01/25/19 Page 2 of 12 PageID 2

II.

JURISDICTION

3.

This Honorable Court is vested with jurisdiction by virtue of 28 U.S.C. §1332(d). This

putative class action is brought by named plaintiff herein on behalf of all others similarly situated,

each of whom are domiciled within the multiple states. Further, the amount in controversy is in

excess of $5,000,000 and there is minimal diversity with over 100 putative class members, thus

CAFA jurisdiction exists.

III.

VENUE

4.

Plaintiff alleges that the cause of action forming the basis of this claim occurred within the

Northern District of Texas, such that venue in this Honorable Court is proper.

IV.

FACTS

5.

Panini is the largest manufacturer in the world of sports collectibles, trading cards and

certified memorabilia with licenses with all major sports, such as the NFL, NBA, baseball and

others.

6.

Panini manufactures individual collectible cards featuring a sports personality which are

sealed in packs (so that the consumer does not know what individual cards it may receive) that are

then sold in boxes. These boxes contain either one or multiple packs of sealed cards, depending

2
 Case 3:19-cv-00201-L Document 1 Filed 01/25/19 Page 3 of 12 PageID 3

on the particular product. Within the packs, Panini randomly places one or more “redemption

cards” instead of an actual card featuring a sports personality. These redemption cards are simply

a white piece of cardboard with a code that has to be scratched off and entered on Panini’s website

in order to receive the actual card featuring the sports personality, which is a card signed by the

sports personality identified on the redemption card. (See photo of a redemption card from a 2016

Panini product, attached hereto as Exhibit “A”). As noted on its website, redemption cards are

placed in packs instead of the actual card because Panini has not had the card autographed by the

player by the time the product is packaged. Interestingly, while Panini states that it “reluctantly

uses redemptions” and Panini “makes every effort to exhaust all possibilities before designation a

redemption card”, redemption cards are actually very common. (See Panini webpage, located at

www.paniniamerica.net/faq.cfm, attached hereto as Exhibit “B”).

7.

The process of redeeming is done through a “reservation process” on Panini’s website. As

per its website, with regard to these redemption cards, Panini guarantees that it “will send a

comparable card in its place if the specified card is not available to ship within 4 months or 8

months depending on what timeframe is selected during the reservation process.” (See Exhibit

“B”).

8.

The “reservation process” Panini refers to is simply entering the redemption card code

online and selecting delivery within 4 or 8 months from a dropdown menu with 4 months being

the default.

3
 Case 3:19-cv-00201-L Document 1 Filed 01/25/19 Page 4 of 12 PageID 4

9.

With regard to the “reservation process” Panini has a well-established pattern and practice

of failing to adhere to its delivery schedule and failing to send the actual cards within the

redeemable timeframe.

10.

In fact, Panini’s failure to honor its redemption process has been reported to the Better

Business Bureau (hereinafter “BBB”) on multiple occasions and some 185 complaints have been

filed. BBB has given Panini an F rating on its scorecard.

11.

It is nearly impossible to contact Panini through any means, including telephone, emails,

posts, etc. This has also been noted on BBB’s website, which reads:

“On November 22, 2017, BBB notified Panini America, Inc. that BBB has
identified concerning patterns in consumer complaints alleging Panini America,
Inc. fails to honor the promised fulfillment and delivery of products after receiving
redemption cards from its customers. Consumers also allege Panini America, Inc.
fails to communicate redemption order status, and fails to respond to emails and
telephone calls.

BBB requested Panini America, Inc.’s voluntary cooperation in eliminating the

As of December 27, 2017, Panini America, Inc. has failed to respond.”

(See BBB webpage located at www.bbb.org/dallas/business-reviews/baseball-cards-and-sports-

12.

Further, Panini also places an expiration date on its redemption cards that is generally

two years redemption. Notice of the expiration date is defective as it is not reasonably placed or

written to alert reasonable consumers. The warning of expiration is in extremely small font and

4
 Case 3:19-cv-00201-L Document 1 Filed 01/25/19 Page 5 of 12 PageID 5

located on the back of the box of cards which may or may not contain one of the redemption

cards at issue.

13.

Despite the presence of an inadequate notice or warning of expiration, the business

practices of Panini render such notice or warning irrelevant. Despite the expiration, Panini

continues to market, distribute and sell boxes or packets of cards that contain redemption cards

that are already beyond the two-year redemption period. A verdict has already been rendered

against another card manufacturer, Upper Deck, for this same exact practice of selling already

expired cards. (See Beckett webpage, located at https://www.beckett.com/news/upper-deck-loses-

court-case-over-redemption-cards/a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “D”).

14.

The failure to timely redeem redemption cards and the practice of marketing, distributing

and selling redemption cards which have already expired is a worldwide problem. The delay or

failure to redeem causes damage to the putative class because the redeemable cards are more often

than not of players whose cards are in high demand at the time of receipt of the redemption card .

A delay can cause the value of said actual card to diminish and, of course, failure to ever supply

the actual card causes additional damage. The putative class is damaged because the putative class

is enticed to purchase Panini cards with the hope of obtaining a redemption card, the putative class

obtains the redemption card which theoretically gives the class ownership of a valuable card, yet

that valuable card is never provided to the putative class by Panini.

15.

One significant example of the violations committed by Panini that are unconscionable and

known to undersigned counsel is that a current starting quarterback in the NFL, Cody Kessler, has

5
 Case 3:19-cv-00201-L Document 1 Filed 01/25/19 Page 6 of 12 PageID 6

numerous autographed cards, including rookie cards, that remain unredeemed as of 2 years since

he was a rookie. In addition to Panini’s failure to redeem these cards, it has also failed to send any

“comparable card” in its place as guaranteed on its website, with the belief that Cody Kessler has

failed to sign any of these cards for Panini for some reason that is unknown to and certainly not

the consumers fault in any way, despite investing money in boxes that contained these redemption

cards.

16.

The number of consumers affected by these actions is suspected to be in the hundreds of

thousands.

V.

NAMED PLAINTIFF’S FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

17.

Putative Class Representative has purchased and collected cards manufactured by Panini

for numerous years but stopped purchasing Panini cards when he realized he would never receive

the redemption at dispute, as he understood this problem to me a universal issue among collectors.

18.

Putative Class Representative has an unexpired card still outstanding with Panini that were

attempted to be redeemed two years ago.

19.

After attempting to reach Panini on numerous occasions by phone and email, Putative Class

Representative eventually realized his actions were fruitless and assumed that he would never

receive his card, which to this date he has not.

6
 Case 3:19-cv-00201-L Document 1 Filed 01/25/19 Page 7 of 12 PageID 7

VI.

CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS

20.

Plaintiff brings this class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) on

behalf of thousands of other consumers who are similarly situated to Plaintiff. The class is defined

as follows:

CLASS DEFINITION

All persons who have initiated the redemption process for an actual card on
Panini’s website and who did not receive a card within the selected timeframe
(4 or 8 months) and/or persons who initiated the redemption process for an
actual card and the redemption was rejected as expired.

21.
The class is so numerous and widespread that joinder of all issues of plaintiffs is

impracticable. Consumers affected by Panini’s actions are anticipated to be in the millions.

Additionally, no attorney would have the financial resources to litigate this case against opposition

from the Defendants when the potential for recovery is so small for each class member. Therefore,

joinder of all similarly situated plaintiffs is appropriate.

COUNT I

(Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act “DTPA”)

Plaintiffs reincorporate and reallege Paragraphs 1 through 21 as if more fully set forth

herein.

22.

Plaintiff brings claims against the Defendants under Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act,

V.T.C.A., Bus. & C. § 17.41, et seq. Panini was served with formal notice on August 15, 2018.

The State of Texas Attorney General was served with formal notice on August 14, 2018.
7
 Case 3:19-cv-00201-L Document 1 Filed 01/25/19 Page 8 of 12 PageID 8

23.

Defendant misrepresents the timeframe in which consumers would obtain cards and fails

to honor expired cards that it sells well beyond the “redemption period.”

24.

Defendant employed, in connection with the sale and advertisement of its product, to all

consumers, deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation, and unfair practices.

25.

As a direct result of the deceptions, frauds, false pretenses, misrepresentations, unfair

practices, concealments, suppressions, and omissions of Defendants, Putative Class Members have

suffered an ascertainable loss of money, namely the value of the card that they have never obtained

from Panini.

26.

Moreover, Defendant’s actions and inactions are intentional and outrageous, without any

justification or excuse, and warrant the imposition of punitive damages and mental anguish under

the DTPA.

27.

In the event the Putative Class is the prevailing party, the Putative Class also seeks a

reasonable attorney’s fee and costs as provided under the DTPA.

8
 Case 3:19-cv-00201-L Document 1 Filed 01/25/19 Page 9 of 12 PageID 9

COUNT II

28.

(Civil Fraud)

Plaintiff reincorporates and realleges Paragraphs 1 through 27 as if more fully set forth

herein.

29.

Putative Class Representative brings civil fraud claims against the Defendant as

material misrepresentations were made; the representations were false; Defendant knew the

representations were false when made; representations were made that it should be acted upon

by Putative Class Representative and others similarly situated; Putative Class Representative

acted in reliance on false statements and suffered injury.

COUNT III

30.

(Tort)

Plaintiff reincorporates and realleges Paragraphs 1 through 29 as if more fully set forth

herein.

9
 Case 3:19-cv-00201-L Document 1 Filed 01/25/19 Page 10 of 12 PageID 10

31.

Putative Class Representative bring claims against the Defendant for tort damages

arising from Defendant’s actions as Putative Class Representative was damaged from the

tortious actions of Defendant.

COUNT IV

(Conspiracy to Defraud)

32.

Putative Class Representative reincorporates and realleges Paragraphs 1 through 31 as

if more fully set forth herein.

33.

Putative Class Representative brings claims against the Defendant for Conspiracy to

Defraud.

34.

Defendants agreed to commit a wrong on the Putative Class Representative by falsely

advertising the availability of a timeframe to deliver a product that Defendant was unable to

fulfill, and by selling expired redemption cards.

35.

Putative Class Representative was injured by the conspiracy to defraud engaged in by

the Defendant.
10
 Case 3:19-cv-00201-L Document 1 Filed 01/25/19 Page 11 of 12 PageID 11

COUNT V

(unjust enrichment)

36.

Putative Class Representative reincorporates and realleges Paragraphs 1 through 35 as

if more fully set forth herein.

37.

Putative Class Representative brings claims against the Defendant for unjust enrichment

as Defendant was unjustly enriched by selling a product that was advertised to be delivered but

never done and selling expired redemption cards while keeping the actual product.

RELIEF SOUGHT

38.

Putative Class Representative reincorporates and realleges Paragraphs 1 through 37 as

if more fully set forth herein.

39.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff and all similarly situated individuals who do not opt out of

this action demand:

a) an order, entered as soon as practicable, certifying this case as a

class action under Rule 23.

11
Case 3:19-cv-00201-L Document 1 Filed 01/25/19 Page 12 of 12 PageID 12

b) an order directing that appropriate notice to class members be

delivered;

c) compensatory damages for Plaintiff and the other Class Members

in an amount which is fair and reasonable to compensate them for their

damages;

d) all damages in an amount which is fair and reasonable;

e) punitive damages;

f) reasonable attorney’s fees and costs; and

g) such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.

40.

Plaintiff and the proposed class members demand a trial by jury.

Respectfully Submitted,
MARTZELL, BICKFORD & CENTOLA

/s/Scott R. Bickford
_________________________________
SCOTT R. BICKFORD, T. A. (TX 02295200)
usdcedtx@mbfirm.com; srb@mbfirm.com
338 Lafayette Street
New Orleans, LA 70130
Tel: (504) 581-9065
Fax: (504) 581-7365
ATTORNEY FOR PUTATIVE CLASS
PLAINTIFFS

12