A Consumer Protection and Employment Law Firm Serving California, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Illinois.

Fools Gold Class Action Lawsuit Filed Against Macy’s

Table Of Contents
Summarize with
ChatGPT Claude Gemini Perplexity Grok


I hope you kept your gift receipt!   A class action lawsuit has been filed against Macy’s Inc., alleging that they fraudulently advertised and sold gold-plated jewelry as “Fine Gold” in violation of the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) standards.

The lawsuit was brought by plaintiff Natalya Barsukov, who on April 18, 2010,  purchased a pair of earrings from Macy’s that were labeled “Fine Gold.”  She was told the earrings were regularly priced at $360.00 but were currently priced at $129.09 due to a “pre-sale.”  Unfortunately, Natalya’s earrings began to exhibit signs of tarnishing and discoloration,  turning  from gold color to gray.   After taking the earings to an independent jeweler, she learned the earrings were not “Fine Gold”  at all,  but sterling silver covered with a microlayer of gold.

According to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) rules, the use of the word “Gold” or any abbreviation is prohibited to describe all or part of any product not composed completely of gold or a gold alloy.  The word “Gold” may be used to describe gold-plated items  if the description  “adequately identifies that the item is only surfaced-plated with gold”.

False advertising can be costly and frustrating, as well as embarrassing if you have given the item as a gift to a loved one thinking that you are giving them “fine gold”.

If you are the victim of false advertising please give my office, The Law Office of Todd M. Friedman a call at (877) 449-8898.

Quick Navigation

Free Consultation

Undisclosed
Settlement

TCPA class action against the Los Angeles Times. Final approval granted 2014.

More Details
$750,000
Settlement

Common fund class-wide TCPA settlement against home healthcare provider. Final approval granted.

More Details
$27.6M
Settlement

TCPA class action certified on behalf of approximately 2,000,000 class members under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3). Subsequently settled on a Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) basis. Final approval granted.

More Details
$5.2M
Settlement

/

Unruh Act class action on behalf of approximately 240,000 consumers challenging Tinder’s age-based differential pricing for its subscription service. Final approval granted; subsequently went up on appeal.

More Details
$390,000
Settlement

TCPA class action alleging HD Supply sent unauthorized marketing text messages to consumers’ mobile phones without consent between October 21, 2011 and July 26, 2017. Presided over by Judge Fernando M. Olguin. Case terminated January 29, 2018.

More Details
$1,500,000
Settlement

/

TCPA class action against a Kansas-based payday lender alleged to have contacted consumers via prerecorded calls on their cell phones to collect alleged debts without consent. California federal judge granted final approval.

More Details
$6,500,000
Settlement

/

Cal. Penal Code § 632.7 class action certified by contested motion under Rule 23(b)(2) and (b)(3) on behalf of over 40,000 class members whose calls were recorded without their knowledge or consent. Final approval granted.

More Details
$13,000,000
Settlement

/

$13 Million Class action alleging HSBC recorded consumer telephone calls without knowledge or consent in violation of California’s Privacy Statute (Penal Code § 632.7). California Federal Judge granted final approval.

More Details
$34,000,000
Settlement

/

One of the largest TCPA class action settlements in U.S. history at time of approval. Alleged Chase used an automatic telephone dialing system to contact consumers on their cell phones without prior express consent from July 2008 through December 2013. Settlement class included over 32 million members. Final approval granted March 2016.

More Details
$150,000,000
Settlement

/

Class action on behalf of over 100,000 owners of GM vehicles equipped with allegedly defective LG-manufactured batteries posing fire and safety risks. Litigation commenced December 2020. U.S. District Judge Terrence G. Berg indicated preliminary approval of the $150 million settlement.

More Details
$100,000,000
Settlement

/ /

Landmark gig-economy class action. DoorDash drivers in California and Massachusetts alleged they were wrongly classified as independent contractors rather than employees. Firm served as class counsel. Final approval granted January 13, 2022 — the largest gig-economy worker class settlement in U.S. history at the time.

More Details

Office Locations

Copyright 2025 Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C. All Rights Reserved.