Ganni refuses to tiptoe when it comes to a lawsuit Steve Madden filed earlier this year.
The two brands have been at odds over the design of ballet flats; though Steve Madden formally filed its complaint against Ganni in July, it alleges that the company had been “harassing and threatening Steve Madden and its customers” for some time leading up to the lawsuit’s filing.
More from Sourcing Journal
The complaint centers around Steve Madden’s Graya and Sandria styles and Ganni’s Feminine Buckle Ballerina and Feminine Buckle Two-Strap Sandal styles. Both feature double straps with rivets and buckles on them.
Steve Madden alleged that Ganni demanded it “cease all sales of the [Graya] shoes and destroy its inventory,” as well as contacted Nordstrom and Dillard’s, requesting that they do the same.
That, the company said, is an attempt on Ganni’s part to “strong-arm Steve Madden’s customers to destroy rightful Steve Madden designs and harm [its] relationships with its customers.”
Steve Madden accused Ganni of interference with business relations and libel. It also asked that a judge declare that it had not infringed on any copyright, patent or trademark Ganni holds in the United States and to declare that it had not engaged in unfair competition.
But Ganni’s not having that. The brand fought back in a response to Steve Madden’s complaint, filed on Nov. 11.
In the response, the company denies many of the allegations its opposition sets forth and has asked the judge on the case to dismiss Steve Madden’s claims against it.
It also uses a variety of affirmative defenses, which seek to bring new evidence to the table in hopes of negating liability—even if the company did what it’s accused of.
Ganni states that it believes Steve Madden “has failed to plead legally cognizable claims upon which relief can be granted” and notes that it believes the court the complaint was filed in—New York’s Eastern District Court—doesn’t have jurisdiction over Steve Madden’s asks for declaratory judgment because “there is no actual controversy between [Steve Madden] and [Ganni] in connection with those claims.”
It later says Steve Madden’s claims are not valid because they’re “barred, in whole or in part, by the doctrines of laches, waiver, estoppel and/or unclean hands.” In simpler terms, Ganni means that Steve Madden’s claims are invalid for any of the following reasons: the company waited too long to bring the claims; the company relinquished its right to make claims at some point; that the complaint somehow contradicts something Steve Madden has previously done or said or that Steve Madden acted in a way that would prevent it from bringing claims of wrongdoing against Ganni.