Megan Perkins v. The New York Times Company

Motion to Dismiss Denied


The New York Times was held liable for failing to clearly disclose automatic subscription renewal terms, leading to unauthorized charges and hidden subscription renewals.

Our analysis

-Meghan Perkins, initiated a lawsuit against The New York Times, alleging wrongful renewal of her digital subscription without her consent and in violation of North Carolina law. Perkins purchased a monthly digital Times subscription at a promotional rate, providing her PayPal information. The lawsuit contends that The New York Times failed to clearly and conspicuously disclose the automatic renewal terms during the subscription process, leading to Perkins unwittingly enrolling in a program where her subscription renewed each month at varying rates. Approximately a year after her subscription began, Perkins's monthly fee doubled without timely notice. Her subscription was renewed an additional twenty-three times without her consent, resulting in unauthorized charges.
-The lawsuit accuses The New York Times of violating all four subsections of the North Carolina Automatic Renewal Statute (N.C.G.S. Section 75-41(a) by inadequately disclosing subscription renewal terms, thus breaching the state's consumer protection laws. The Complaint brings one claim under the North Carolina Automatic Renewal Statute, one claim of unfair and deceptive trade practices under North Carolina law (N.C.G.S. Section 75-16), and one claim of unjust enrichment. The alleged deceptive pattern involves hidden subscriptions, in contravention of North Carolina law.


The motion to dismiss the case by the New York Times Company is denied.


Megan Perkins and The New York Times Company

Case number


Related deceptive patterns

Related laws

Legal enforcement database by Leiser, Santos and Doshi

The information about laws and cases on this website is brought to you by the Leiser, Santos and Doshi enforcement database.

About us