The JCPenney class action lawsuit landscape includes one closed settlement and several live cases. The $50 million Spann settlement resolved California false-discount claims in 2016 and is no longer accepting claims. Since JCPenney emerged from bankruptcy in December 2020, new class actions have been filed in California, Oregon, and Washington accusing the retailer of continuing the same inflated “original price” advertising, and a separate 2026 case in Illinois targets a facial-scan tool on the JCPenney website and app.
The 2016 Spann Settlement Is Closed
If you are searching because you remember hearing about a JCPenney payout, this is almost certainly the case. Cynthia Spann sued J.C. Penney Corporation in 2012 in the Central District of California, alleging the retailer set inflated “original” or “regular” prices on private-label and exclusive-brand clothing and accessories, then advertised steep markdowns from prices that had never actually applied during the three months before the ad, as California law requires.1Truthinadvertising.org. Discounts at J.C. Penney Stores JCPenney denied the allegations but agreed in November 2015 to pay $50 million.2CBS News. J.C. Penney to Make $50M Available to Settle Lawsuit
The class covered California customers who bought private or exclusive branded apparel or accessories advertised at a discount of at least 30 percent off the “original” or “regular” price during two windows: November 5, 2010 through January 31, 2012, or January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2014. No proof of purchase was required. The claim deadline was June 30, 2016.3Top Class Actions. JC Penney Fake Sale Class Action Lawsuit Settlement
Class members could choose cash or a non-expiring, transferable store credit of equal value. Payment amounts were not fixed; each claimant’s share depended on qualifying spend, total valid claims filed, and deductions from the fund.4PR Newswire. JCPenney Shoppers Settlement Notice U.S. District Judge Fernando M. Olguin granted final approval on September 30, 2016, calling the deal “fair, reasonable, and adequate” and citing risks at trial, including what he described as a “huge cloud of uncertainty concerning JCPenney’s financial stability.” Only seven class members objected and 809 opted out.5CaseMine. Spann v. J.C. Penney Corp., SA CV 12-0215 FMO The settlement also required JCPenney to change its price-comparison advertising and adopt annual monitoring and employee training. A lone objector’s appeal briefly froze payments in October 2016 but was dismissed a month later.3Top Class Actions. JC Penney Fake Sale Class Action Lawsuit Settlement
The claim window closed nearly a decade ago and cannot be reopened.
Why the 2020 Bankruptcy Matters
JCPenney filed for Chapter 11 in May 2020. A joint venture of Simon Property Group and Brookfield Asset Management acquired the operating business through a roughly $1 billion credit bid, and the company emerged on December 7, 2020, as Penney OpCo LLC. The plan effectively wiped out general unsecured creditors. By early 2024, trustees confirmed the “Unsecured Claims Earnout Pool” was worth zero, meaning consumers holding pre-bankruptcy claims recovered nothing.6ElevenFlo. JCPenney Chapter 11 Sale Simon Brookfield
The newer lawsuits sidestep that problem by suing Penney OpCo directly and alleging the deceptive practices have continued under the new ownership.7Truthinadvertising.org. Gamble v. Penney OpCo LLC Complaint
Active False-Pricing Cases Against Penney OpCo
Carranza v. Old Copper Company (California, 2023)
In February 2023, a new false-pricing class action was filed in the Southern District of California. Carranza v. Old Copper Company, Inc., named for the former corporate parent, accuses JCPenney of continuing to advertise inflated online reference prices to make discounts look larger than they are.8ClassAction.org. JCPenney Hit With Class Action Over Alleged Use of False Reference Prices Online No class certification ruling or settlement has been reported.9Top Class Actions. JCPenney Class Action Claims Store Advertises Fictitious Original Prices Discounts
Gamble v. Penney OpCo (Oregon, 2024)
Jacy Gamble filed suit on August 26, 2024, in the District of Oregon, alleging violations of the Oregon Unlawful Trade Practices Act. The complaint relies on daily pricing data showing JCPenney has advertised perpetual discounts on roughly 90 percent of its products since emerging from bankruptcy.7Truthinadvertising.org. Gamble v. Penney OpCo LLC Complaint Judge Mustafa T. Kasubhai denied JCPenney’s motion to compel arbitration on July 1, 2025. JCPenney filed an interlocutory appeal to the Ninth Circuit, and the case was stayed on August 14, 2025, pending that appeal.10PACER Monitor. Gamble v. Penney OpCo LLC
Close v. Penney OpCo (Washington, 2024)
In September 2024, Vicky Close filed a class action in the Western District of Washington after buying a “Multi Sac” crossbody bag advertised as marked down from $50 to $20. She alleged the bag had never sold for $50 and had recently been offered for as little as $14. The court denied JCPenney’s motion to compel arbitration. It found the arbitration clause in the JCPenney Rewards Program “illusory” under Texas law because JCPenney reserved the right to modify or terminate the agreement without notice, and it rejected reliance on the website’s browsewrap terms because the link was buried at the bottom of the page and the plaintiff was never shown to have agreed.11FindLaw. Close v. Penney Opco LLC
Close’s case faces a significant new obstacle. On April 2, 2026, the Washington Supreme Court ruled 6–3 in Montes v. SPARC Group LLC that “disappointed expectations do not support a CPA claim” and that a consumer must allege the product was objectively different from or less valuable than what was advertised. The ruling could limit false-reference-pricing claims under Washington law.12Washington State Courts. Montes v. SPARC Group LLC, No. 104162-4
Arcand v. Catalyst Brands: Deceptive Marketing Emails (2025)
A different theory arrived on August 1, 2025, when Julie Arcand sued JCPenney, now operating as Catalyst Brands LLC, over marketing emails to Washington residents. The case was later removed to the Western District of Washington.13Top Class Actions. JCPenney’s BOGO and 70% Off Email Deals Spark Class Action Lawsuit The complaint targets three practices:
- Email subject lines advertising 25 to 70 percent off prices Arcand says JCPenney never or almost never actually charges.
- “Buy One Get One Free” offers that allegedly recover the “free” item’s cost by inflating the price of the first.
- “Limited time” sales that, according to the complaint, run continuously.
The suit invokes both the Washington Consumer Protection Act and the Washington Commercial Electronic Mail Act, seeking $500 in statutory damages per email with a false or misleading subject line. It relies on the Washington Supreme Court’s 2025 ruling in Brown v. Old Navy, LLC, which held that a misleading email subject line is a per se violation of the state’s commercial email statute.14Truthinadvertising.org. Arcand v. Catalyst Brands LLC Complaint JCPenney has moved to compel arbitration and to stay the case pending related appeals. As of late 2025, both motions were fully briefed and awaiting a ruling from Judge David G. Estudillo.15Justia Dockets. Arcand v. Catalyst Brands LLC, 2:25-cv-01445
Borovoy v. Penney OpCo: Facial-Scan Privacy (2026)
The newest JCPenney class action is not about pricing. Filed in March 2026 in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, Borovoy v. Penney OpCo LLC (Case No. 2026CH02396) alleges that an AI-powered “Skincare Advisor” tool on the JCPenney website and mobile app scans users’ faces to recommend cosmetics. Plaintiff Christine Borovoy claims the tool captures and stores facial biometric data without the notice, written consent, or published retention and destruction policy required by the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act. The suit seeks statutory damages, injunctive relief, and a jury trial for a proposed class of Illinois consumers.16Top Class Actions. JCPenney Skincare Tool Sparks Class Action Over Facial Scan Privacy Concerns
What This Means If You Shopped at JCPenney
The Spann settlement is done, and the 2020 bankruptcy closed off recovery on pre-bankruptcy consumer claims. The active cases are still at early stages, mostly tied up on arbitration and appeals rather than class notice or payouts, so there is nothing to file a claim on yet. If any of them reaches a certified class or settlement, notice typically goes to affected customers by email or mail, and settlement administrators publish claim forms online. Watch the docket for the case that matches where you shopped and what you are complaining about: online reference prices (Carranza, Gamble, Close), marketing emails (Arcand), or the Skincare Advisor tool (Borovoy).