Slide 1
Slide 2
Slide 3
Slide 5
Slide 4
Slide 6
Slide 7
Slide 8
Slide 9
Slide 10
Slide 11
Slide 12
Slide 13
Slide 14
Slide 16
Slide 17
Slide 18
Slide 19
Slide 20
Slide 21
Slide 23
Slide 24
Slide 24
Slide 25
Slide 26
Slide 27
Slide 28
Slide 29
Slide 30
Slide 31
Slide 32
Slide 33
Slide 34
Slide 35
Slide 36
Slide 37
Slide 38
Slide 39
Slide 40
Slide 41
Slide 42
Slide 43
Slide 44
Slide 45
Slide 46
Slide 47
Slide 48
Slide 49
Slide 50
Slide 51
Slide 52
Slide 53
Slide 54
Slide 54
Slide 55
Slide 56
Slide 57
Slide 58
Slide 58
Slide 59
Slide 59
Slide 60
Slide 61
Slide 61
Slide 62
Slide 63

Judge Dismisses Most Claims in Webway 360 Vs. Xerox Lawsuit.

Toner News Mobile › Forums › Toner News Main Forums › Judge Dismisses Most Claims in Webway 360 Vs. Xerox Lawsuit.

Tonernews.com, November 14, 2025. USA
  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #711732

    toner
    Keymaster

    On November 12, 2025, Judge Michael E. Farbiarz of the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey issued an Opinion and Order in Webway 360, Inc. v. Xerox Corporation et al., No. 2:25-cv-03402, significantly narrowing the scope of a lawsuit involving a malfunctioning commercial printer.

    Webway 360, a print shop, filed a lawsuit against multiple Xerox entities after leasing a high-end printer that allegedly “never worked properly.” The complaint included claims for breach of contract, breach of warranty, negligence, and violations of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act.

    In his ruling, Judge Farbiarz dismissed the breach of contract and express warranty claims, finding that Webway 360 failed to point to specific contractual obligations or warranty terms that had been violated. He also ruled that the implied warranty claims were barred by clear and conspicuous disclaimers in the equipment agreements—except in the case of the Xerox parent company and the printer-servicing affiliate, who were not parties to the contracts.

    The Court also dismissed the consumer fraud claim, reasoning that enforcing a lease agreement does not constitute deceptive conduct under the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act. However, the negligence and declaratory judgment claims were allowed to proceed, pending further factual development.

    In short, the ruling leaves only limited warranty and negligence claims in play, highlighting the importance of specific pleadings and the enforceability of warranty disclaimers in commercial equipment lease agreements. For full details, see the court’s decision here: Webway 360, Inc. v. Xerox Corporation.

  • Author
    November 14, 2025 at 10:42 AM
Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty, or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action based on the content on our site.