Filed in New York federal court on behalf of named plaintiff Edward Ruffo the potential lawsuit is seeking to represent a class of nationwide consumers who purchased the SpringBlade, a model released by Adidas in 2013 and which features an array of angled, flexible plastic blades in place of a traditional midsole, purported by Adidas to enable "explosive"running performance, according to the complaint.
The lawsuit contends that the trademark blades on the shoe have an inherent defect: the way they absorb the shock of a runner's footfalls puts undue stress on the plastic base of the blades, causing it to break after very little use.
"Despite six years of development and extensive testing which should have revealed the defective design of the sole of the SpringBlade, Adidas released the SpringBlade running shoe to the general public representing that its design was the 'cutting edge' of running shoe technology,"the complaint states. "As a result of Adidas' deceptive claims, consumers, including plaintiff and other members of the proposed class have purchased an expensive product which fails to perform as advertised."
The lawsuit further contends that Adidas released a new version of the shoe, the SpringBlade Ignite, in 2015, which uses a more flexible material for part of the midsole, and which fixes the problem it was alerted to by customer complaints and showing that it knew about the defect.
Ruffo seeks to represent a nationwide class and a subclass of New York residents, and alleges breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty and unjust enrichment, and on behalf of the New York subclass only, alleges violation of the New York Deceptive Acts and Practices Act.
Ruffo is represented by Thomas Peter Guiffra of Rheingold Valet Rheingold McCartney & Giuffra LLP. The case is Edward A. Ruffo v. Adidas America Inc., case number 1:15-cv-05989, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York.