lawsuit

Some of New York's top modeling agencies are named in a multimillion-dollar lawsuit that alleges they've used shady accounting practices to hold onto money they should have paid their models.

A group of models claiming that Ford, Wilhelmina, Elite, and Women, among others — as well as brands like L'Oréal, Aveda, and Revlon — have withheld hefty portions of their royalties. Louisa Raske, a model who appeared on the May/June 2005 cover of Brides, at left, is leading the class action suit and seeks $20 million in damages. Her 19-page summons claims that these agencies commonly work on the models' behalf without the models knowing it, and arrange deals "as if the modeling agencies had contacted the models and had the legal authority to execute the documents."

The suit goes on to say that "since the models are unaware of the extended/expanded usages for which the modeling agencies have negotiated and received payment on their behalf . . . the models never demand or receive payment, and at the very least, the modeling agencies are unjustly enriched by the models' funds."

Raske's suit also claims that in a similar case decided in 2005, some models were told they would "never again model in New York" if they sued their agencies. The models in that case won a $22 million settlement.

Representatives for Ford and Wilhelmina did not respond to requests for comment on this post. But Susan Scafidi, founder of the Fashion Law Institute at Fordham University and a board member of the Model Alliance, told us that model payment has been an issue for quite some time.

"Models have repeatedly expressed concern about lack of transparency in agency accounting practices," Scafidi said in an email. "While some agencies are more conscientious and professional than others, a lawsuit was perhaps inevitable — though the scale of this one is quite dramatic."

A full list of the defendants in this case can be found below.

Modeling Agencies:

• Next Management LLC
• Wilhelmina Models Inc.
• Wilhelmina International Ltd.
• Ford Models Inc.
• Elite Model Management — New York LLC
• DNA Model Management LLC
• IMG Models Inc.
• Trump Model Management LLC
• MC2 dba aka Karin Models of New York LLC
• Major Model Management Inc.
• Silent Models LLC
• Fusion Model Management Inc.
• Marilyn Model Management Inc.
• 1 Management LLC
• Red Model Management Inc.
• Request Model Management Inc.
• Supreme Model Management LLC
• VNY Model Management Inc.
• Men Women NY Model Management Inc.
• APM Models Inc.
• Q Model Management dba aka New York Model Management Inc.
• Click Model Management Inc.
• S Model Management LLC
• Elite Model Management Corporation
• NYC Management Group Inc.

Advertising Agencies:

• McCann-Erickson USA Inc.
• McCann-Erickson Corporation
• Ogilvy + Mather Partners Inc.
• Publicis Inc.
• JWT LLC
• Laird + Partners New York LLC
• Leo Burnett Company Inc.
• Saatchi + Saatchi North America Inc.
• Kirshenbaum Bond & Partners Inc.

Beauty Brands:

• L'Oréal USA Inc.
• Revlon Inc.
• Garnier LLC
• Coty Inc.
• Aveda Corporation
• Sephora USA Inc.
• Maybelline LLC.

Well, this took long enough. A year after Yves Saint Laurent and Christian Louboutin sued each other over a pair of red-soled shoes, YSL has filed a motion to dismiss its case against the French shoemaker.

The newest development comes just a month after a New York judge decided that Louboutin has the right to its trademark on red-soled shoes — except in the case of a shoe that's red all over. An all-red shoe with a red sole that YSL produced last year is what prompted Louboutin to sue YSL for trademark infringement last April. The ruling means that technically, both firms can claim victory in this case — and that's exactly what YSL's lawyer David Bernstein did today.

"Now that the Court of Appeals has definitively ruled for Yves Saint Laurent and has dismissed Christian Louboutin's claims, Yves Saint Laurent has decided to end what was left of the litigation and refocus its energies on its business and its creative designs," Bernstein said. "By dismissing the case now, Yves Saint Laurent also wishes to ensure that the Court will not make any further rulings that put at risk the ability of fashion designers to trademark color in appropriate cases."

Louboutin's lawyers may not agree with that interpretation of last month's ruling, but they were happy about it. Harley Levin, who represents the shoemaker, said, "The two key elements we sought answered were that color can be a trademark in the fashion industry and that our trademark is valid and enforceable — thank God."

Photo via Christian Louboutin.

Christian Louboutin received a reason to celebrate today when a New York federal court of appeals judge ruled that the red sole on his iconic shoes should be given trademark protection after all.

Now, except in the case of shoes that are red all over, Louboutin will be able to defend itself against shoemakers who copy its red soles. Armed with the new protection, Louboutin's lawyers will next square off against attorneys for Yves Saint Laurent. The parties have been engaged in a legal battle concerning a pair of red-soled YSL pumps for over a year.

Louboutin asked a New York court to prevent YSL from selling its own all-red, red-soled shoes last April. YSL pushed back in court papers, arguing that Louboutin's trademark on red soles, which it has held since 2008, should never have been granted in the first place. The judge agreed and asked Louboutin to prove it deserved the trademark.

Today's decision will undoubtedly vindicate Louboutin himself, whose lawyers have said he was ready to "fight like hell to the end." Late last month, the designer referred to the case as being "very much a double standard."

Photo via Christian Louboutin.

Those stories and more in our daily news roundup.

• "As soon as I met Alexandra, I fell in love with her look and once I heard her sing, I was blown away by her incredible talent," says Erin Fetherston of singer Alexandra McDermott, who will perform at her Spring 2013 presentation and stars in Fetherston's Spring lookbook. [Fashionologie Inbox]
  

• Gucci is sponsoring a tribute to David Bowie's style at London's Victoria and Albert Museum that will open next March. The exhibit, called David Bowie is, will feature over 300 objects, including costumes, handwritten notes, set designs, and album artwork, among other items. [The Daily Telegraph]
  

• Just in time for New York Fashion Week, WWD has released an iPhone app designed to "deliver the news in whatever form our audience needs," says the paper's editor in chief Edward Nardoza. [WWD]
  

• The theme of Tommy Hilfiger's Spring 2013 collection is American optimism. Fitting, as he'll be showing on the same day and at the same time as another big name, Chado Ralph Rucci. [WWD]
  

• H&M will provide a free shuttle service in New York City on Fashion's Night Out. Double-decker buses will pick up and drop off passengers at four locations: 51st Street at Fifth Avenue; 59th Street at Lexington Avenue; Broadway at Prince Street; and 34th Street at Seventh Avenue. [Fashionologie Inbox]
  

• Hermés announced Tuesday that it sued LVMH in July, accusing the luxury conglomerate of insider training and manipulating stock prices in its acquisition of Hermés stock. [Styleite]

For the first time since last April, Christian Louboutin has spoken out about the ongoing legal dispute between his company and Yves Saint Laurent over who has the right to put a red sole on a shoe.

"It's my trademark," says Louboutin simply in a new interview with WSJ. Magazine. "For two months I said, 'Fix it,' and nothing happened. Then they tried to kill me by saying I can't own a color. But they own colors for their makeup and the red-and-green stripe for Gucci. It's very much a double standard."

The legal volleys haven't distracted Louboutin from creating more pairs of red-soled shoes. But he says the focus of those shoes has never been on women's feet.

"The thing I always try to remember is that feet are attached to the leg, and that you must prolong the silhouette. The shoe elongates the leg and does it discreetly. The goal is to get people to look at a woman's legs. It's all about the leg." He pauses. "No, it's not about the leg. It's about the woman."

After five months of legal volleys, the courts have ended the $450 million lawsuit accusing Alexander Wang of operating a sweatshop in New York City.

Judge Harold Baer of the New York federal court dismissed the suit on Monday, but lawyers for the plaintiffs and the defendants came to a settlement at the beginning of August. Terms of this agreement were not disclosed, but one of its stipulations was that both sides request the case be thrown out.

"We are gratified that this matter has been dismissed, as the allegations were unfounded and completely false," said a spokesman for Wang. Lawyers for the plaintiffs have not commented on the matter.

The suit has been the focus of much media scrutiny since it was filed in March, when a group of 30 former Wang employees led by Wenyu Lu claimed they had been forced to work 16 days with no breaks in a cramped, windowless room. Another former employee, Flor Duarte, filed a separate suit later in which she claimed that she was fired after applying for workers' compensation. From the beginning of the case, spokespeople for Wang have said they would "vehemently defend any allegations" of wrongdoing, but that didn't stop the brand's SoHo store from being egged in late March.

A week after the egging, lawyers for Wang said in court papers that Lu was disgruntled because he was fired for bullying other employees. In June, the lawyers said Lu and Duarte had "mischaracterized their former workplace as a hovel, while attempting to portray defendants as 'sweatshop owners,'" in an attempt to exact a big settlement.

Alexander Wang's fashion label filed court papers on Wednesday in which it once again denied that it ever operated a sweatshop. The documents called the people suing the company for poor working conditions "two disgruntled former employees with axes to grind."

In the papers, lawyers for Wang said the only reason Wenyu Lu and Flor Durante filed suit against the company in March was to "exact a substantial settlement from the defendants, and that the two have mischaracterized their former workplace as a hovel, while attempting to portray defendants as 'sweatshop owners.'"

But according to the defense, nothing could be further from the truth. Wang's lawyers say the company's workspace at 386 Broadway in New York — which Lu described as a windowless room — is in reality a "modern, brightly lit studio with high ceilings and large windows." The papers say that Lu and Durante, who both worked as sewers, were paid $25 and $22 per hour, respectively.

The papers said Wang employees were allowed to take breaks during the workday and were eligible for a wide variety of benefits, including paid vacation and medical and dental insurance. Additionally, the papers emphasize that the designer and all of the defendants named in the suit "have complied with all applicable wage and hour and leave laws, and there is no basis whatsoever for plaintiffs' frivolous and entirely unsupportable accusations that defendants have harassed them or discriminated against them on the basis of their race, or on any other protected basis."

Lu filed the original lawsuit in March, when he claimed that he had been forced to work 25 hours without taking a break when he worked for Wang. The other plaintiff, who has been identified as both Flor Durante and Flor Duarte, claimed she was fired after applying for worker's compensation.

Photo: Alexander Wang attends a party hosted by Lacoste during Coachella.

>> Guess left the final courtroom session of its trademark infringement case with Gucci on slightly stronger footing, but the judge in the case has yet to make a final decision.

Daniel Petrocelli, defense lawyer for Guess, argued yesterday that his client's products simply didn't infringe on any of Gucci's "weak trademarks," primarily because other brands had similar designs. He also pointed out that if Gucci had been legitimately concerned about Guess making Gucci knockoffs over 20 years ago, it would have filed this lawsuit sooner.

Judge Shira Scheindlin asked Gucci's lawyer Louis Ederer why his client didn't come to court sooner and didn't seem satisfied by his answer that at the time, Gucci's focus was on shutting down counterfeiters.

Still, Ederer's closing statement maintained that Guess wantonly re-created Gucci's products. Earlier in the trial, he presented emails between Guess and its licensees that suggest Guess worked specifically to mimic Gucci's style.

"This was a perfect storm of willful infringement," Ederer said. "It was in fact a calculated scheme."

Calculated or not, the Guess team left the court in high spirits.

"We had a good day," said Guess CEO Paul Marciano, who testified in the trial last week. "I think we put up, in my view, overwhelming evidence of good faith that there was no infringement."

Scheindlin is expected to hand down her final decision on the case within the next few months.

Gucci's lawsuit claims that over 150 products produced by Guess and its licensees since the late '80s knocked off Gucci's signature diamond logo pattern and striped ribbon motif. The suit seeks damages of $221 million and an order for Guess to stop selling the offending products.

Photo: Marciano with model Alyssa Miller in 2010.

>> The lawsuit accusing Alexander Wang of operating a sweatshop in New York City will soon be discontinued, only to be refiled in federal court in short order.

Wenyu Lu — whose original $50 million suit accused Alexander and his brother Dennis Wang of using exploitative labor practices in their New York workspace — filed a motion to discontinue the suit last Thursday. Lu's lawyer Ming Hai told Page Six that Lu plans to resubmit the suit to federal court, where he'll be represented by another lawyer who has more experience with labor law. Lu's suit claimed that he was forced to work for 25 hours straight without a break. Another former employee, Flor Duarte, filed a suit claiming that she was fired after filing for worker's compensation.

Wang's camp has repeatedly denied the allegations, telling Page Six, "The claims of sweatshop conditions were completely and utterly untrue in every respect."

On Thursday, the Oakland, CA-based Center For Environmental Health (CEH) filed a suit against 26 cosmetic companies, claiming the beauty brands have been misleading the public with their misuse of the term "organic."

Even though the California Organic Products Act of 2003 states that any product with an "organic" label on the front must consist of 70 percent organic ingredients (and those with less than 70 percent organic ingredients can only use "organic" on the ingredients list), the CEH discovered that many were in direct violation of the act. (See the full list of claimed offenders here.) Find out what else was discovered when you keep reading.