April 12, 2013

Penney gets OK to sell Martha Stewart wares

While Macy’s appeals the ruling, the items are set to reach shelves in May under the Everyday label.

Los Angeles Times

Score one for J.C. Penney, the beleaguered retailer that just kicked out its chief executive in search of a better reputation. The department store chain Friday won the right to sell Martha Stewart products – as long as they’re unbranded.

This to the consternation of Macy’s, which is in the middle of a court battle with J.C. Penney and Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia claiming that the two violated its exclusive contract with the domestic diva.

In New York State Supreme Court, Macy’s had asked Justice Jeffrey Oing to expand an existing preliminary injunction barring J.C. Penney from selling Stewart-branded home goods until the non-jury trial concludes.

Oing declined the request Friday. He also dismissed Macy’s claim of unfair competition against J.C. Penney.

J.C. Penney can, for now, sell Stewart items under its Everyday label, which does not carry Stewart’s name. The disputed items, which had been held in storage, will reach shelves in May.

In a statement, J.C. Penney said it was “pleased with the court’s ruling” and that it believes the Everyday line “will be a compelling part of our overall home assortment.”

The chain’s new home section, featuring partnerships with brands such as Royal Velvet and Happy Chic by Jonathan Adler, was also designed as a showcase for Stewart.

Ron Johnson, a key architect of the retailer’s dealings with Stewart, was ousted as J.C. Penney’s chief executive on Monday and replaced with his predecessor.

Macy’s, in a statement, said it is “disappointed” in the ruling. The company stressed that the decision is “not a final determination of Macy’s claims” and said it plans “to file an immediate appeal.”

J.C. Penney, Stewart and Macy’s returned to court this week after a monthlong mediation effort ordered by Oing failed. But Gregory G. Little, a partner at law firm White & Case, said that Friday’s action could bring them back to talks.

“It is a bit of a compromise decision that may encourage the parties to reach a settlement of this dispute,” he said.

Were you interviewed for this story? If so, please fill out our accuracy form

Send question/comment to the editors

Further Discussion

Here at PressHerald.com we value our readers and are committed to growing our community by encouraging you to add to the discussion. To ensure conscientious dialogue we have implemented a strict no-bullying policy. To participate, you must follow our Terms of Use.

Questions about the article? Add them below and we’ll try to answer them or do a follow-up post as soon as we can. Technical problems? Email them to us with an exact description of the problem. Make sure to include:
  • Type of computer or mobile device your are using
  • Exact operating system and browser you are viewing the site on (TIP: You can easily determine your operating system here.)