Italian luxury brand Dolce & Gabbana has secured a crucial win in a class-action lawsuit that alleges the brand failed to deliver promised benefits tied to its $25 million DGFamily NFT project.
Court documents published on July 11 reveal that a New York federal judge has dismissed the case against Dolce & Gabbana USA Inc., the only US-based defendant in the suit, effectively weakening the broader action brought by plaintiff Luke Brown.
The court found insufficient grounds to hold the American subsidiary liable for the alleged actions of its Italian parent company.
The lawsuit, originally filed in May 2024 and amended in September, accuses Dolce & Gabbana and its Dubai-based partner UNXD of selling high-value NFTs under the “DGFamily” brand without fulfilling the associated perks.
These included exclusive digital fashion items, physical merchandise, and access to events, which were supposed to be delivered quarterly over two years.
According to the complaint, the NFTs were delayed, partially delivered, or never fulfilled, causing customers to lose significant value, up to 97% in some cases.
Brown, who claims to have lost $5,800 on the purchase of a DGFamily NFT, filed the suit on behalf of a putative class, arguing that both Dolce & Gabbana USA and Dolce & Gabbana SRL operated as a joint entity.
The complaint also named UNXD and Bluebear Italia SRL, the creator of a separate NFT collection called “inBetweeners,” allegedly linked to the broader promotional scheme, but neither of these foreign defendants has been served to date.
In its ruling, the court concluded that Dolce & Gabbana USA could not be treated as the “alter ego” of its Italian parent.
Despite allegations of shared executives, overlapping personnel, and common branding, Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald held that the complaint lacked specific facts showing that the US entity had direct involvement in the NFT project or was dominated to such an extent that it should be held liable for the parent’s actions.
The court rejected the plaintiff’s argument that general overlap in staffing or office use was enough to establish complete domination or fraud.
“Overlapping ownership and personnel alone cannot establish an alter ego relationship,” the judge wrote, citing precedent.
Dolce & Gabbana USA moved to dismiss the case in January 2025, maintaining that it was a separate legal entity uninvolved in the marketing, sale, or development of the DGFamily NFTs.
The company denied forming any joint venture with UNXD or participating in the project’s execution, and has argued that the NFT initiative originated and was managed entirely by Dolce & Gabbana SRL and its international collaborators.
With the dismissal of Dolce & Gabbana USA, the future of the class-action suit remains uncertain.
A number of high-profile NFT cases have wrapped up in the U.S. since the start of 2025.
In January, DraftKings reached a settlement with the NFL Players Association over NFTs featuring player likenesses, ending claims of unfulfilled obligations under their 2021 fantasy‑sports agreement.
Later, in April, Shaquille O’Neal agreed to an $11 million settlement in a class action concerning his promotion of the Solana‑based “Astrals” NFT project.
