Estimated reading time: 13 minutes.
Key facts
- Case: Haney v. Costa Del Mar, Inc., Case No. 16-2017-CA-004794, Circuit Court of the Fourth Judicial Circuit in and for Duval County, Florida.
- Settlement: Costa Del Mar, Inc. agreed to pay $21,750,000 into a settlement fund. Costa denies wrongdoing, and the court has not ruled on the merits.
- Who is included: Florida citizens who bought non-prescription, non-promotional Costa sunglasses for personal use from July 28, 2013 through January 31, 2018 (Purchase Class), or who were charged a fee by Costa from July 28, 2012 through January 26, 2025 to replace damaged parts of Costa sunglasses bought on or before January 31, 2018 (Repair Class).
- Claim deadline: January 11, 2027, for Purchase Class members only. Repair Class members are paid automatically.
- Opt-out and objection deadline: January 19, 2027.
- Final approval hearing: March 23, 2027 at 9:00 a.m. Eastern in Jacksonville.
- Payments: $6,375,000 is set aside for the Purchase Class. The court's preliminary approval order cites estimates of about $51 per Purchase Class claim and about $42 per Repair Class claim.
In this article
- What the settlement resolves
- Who Costa Del Mar is
- The nominal fee promise on the box
- The two laws behind the case
- What the settlement pays
- Who is in the settlement classes
- How to claim and your other options
- How this differs from the Smith and Reed cases
- Timeline
- What remains uncertain
- Frequently asked questions
What the settlement resolves
Florida buyers of Costa sunglasses may be owed money from a $21.75 million settlement in a lawsuit about a single phrase printed on the side of the brand's sunglass boxes. The case claimed Costa promised to fix damaged sunglasses for a "nominal fee" and then charged far more.
A court-authorized summary notice ran on PR Newswire on October 12, 2026 with a Jacksonville dateline. The official settlement website, run by the court-appointed administrator Epiq Class Action & Claims Solutions, now lists the deadlines and court documents.
Circuit Judge Bruce R. Anderson Jr. preliminarily approved the settlement in an order e-filed September 22, 2026. Preliminary approval means the judge found the deal fair enough to send notice to class members. It is not final approval. That decision is set for a hearing on March 23, 2027.
The settlement ends a case that, according to the preliminary approval order, had been pending with related actions for about nine years. The case went to trial in January 2026. The settlement agreement says that trial ended in a mistrial, and the parties agreed on settlement terms on April 2, 2026.
Who Costa Del Mar is
Costa Del Mar makes polarized sunglasses sold in retail stores and directly to consumers. The 2018 complaint described Costa Del Mar, Inc. as a Florida corporation with its principal place of business in Daytona Beach, and quoted Costa's own description of itself as "the fourth largest and fastest growing sunglass brand in America."
The settlement agreement's release covers Costa and its parent companies and affiliates, and it "specifically includes EssilorLuxottica and any and all of its subsidiaries and affiliates." The court documents reviewed for this article do not otherwise describe Costa's corporate ownership.
The plaintiff is Brendan Haney, whom the complaint describes as a citizen of Duval County, Florida. The court appointed him class representative. His lawyers at Holland & Knight LLP in Jacksonville, Peter P. Hargitai, Joshua H. Roberts, Laura B. Renstrom, and Michael M. Gropper, are class counsel. Costa is represented by McGuireWoods LLP.
The nominal fee promise on the box
According to the complaint, every Costa sunglass box carried this text under the heading "BACKED FOR LIFE": Costa offered a limited lifetime warranty against manufacturer's defects, "And if our sunglasses are damaged by accident, normal wear and tear, or misuse, we replace scratched lenses, frames, and other parts for a nominal fee."
The complaint alleged that buyers who sent in damaged sunglasses were instead charged $89 for replacement glass lenses, $69 for plastic lenses, or $49 for frames, plus shipping and handling. It cited dictionary definitions of "nominal" as a trifling or token amount.
Haney's own story, as told in the complaint, began with a pair of Costa sunglasses he bought for $149 in Jacksonville on April 1, 2016. One lens shattered by accident in March 2017. He filled out Costa's online repair form, paid to mail the glasses in, and was told replacement lenses would cost $89 plus tax and shipping. The complaint says Costa charged him $105.18 on April 27, 2017.
The complaint also alleged that Costa did not post repair prices on its website and would not give repair assessments by phone, so customers learned the cost only after shipping their sunglasses. Class counsel's fee motion states that Costa stopped distributing sunglasses in boxes carrying the nominal-fee language after the lawsuit was filed.
These are allegations
The descriptions of Costa's repair charges and practices come from the plaintiff's complaint and class counsel's filings. Costa denies wrongdoing, and no judge or jury has decided whether the "nominal fee" language was a warranty or whether Costa broke the law.
The two laws behind the case
The lawsuit relied on two statutes.
The Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (FDUTPA) bars unfair or deceptive business practices aimed at consumers. Haney argued the "nominal fee" promise was deceptive because a reasonable consumer would expect a nominal fee to be far less than what Costa charged. Under this claim, he sought the difference in value between sunglasses with a lifetime of nominal-fee repairs and sunglasses without that promise. This claim is the basis for the Purchase Class.
The Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (MMWA) is a federal law governing written warranties on consumer products. Haney argued the box language was a written warranty and that Costa breached it by charging more than a nominal fee. He sought the difference between what each person paid for a repair and what a jury found to be a nominal fee, which he contended is at most $11.95. This claim is the basis for the Repair Class.
Costa denied both claims. According to the long-form notice, Costa argued that the box language was marketing, not a promise or warranty; that its fees were in fact nominal; that buyers who never saw the box language could not show harm; that buyers did not rely on the language; that any express warranty covered only manufacturer's defects; and that it fully honored any warranty it made.
The court first certified the case as a class action in a 93-page order on April 12, 2019, according to the fee motion. Class certification means a judge allowed one person to sue on behalf of a larger group. The 2025 notice of that certification gave class members until July 14, 2025 to exclude themselves.
What the settlement pays
Costa will pay $21,750,000 into a qualified settlement fund. Under the settlement agreement, none of it returns to Costa if the settlement becomes final.
The fund is split two ways:
- Purchase Class: $6,375,000 is set aside. Each approved claimant receives one pro rata share, meaning an equal portion, for each qualifying purchase claimed.
- Repair Class: Whatever remains after the Purchase Class share, court-approved attorneys' fees and expenses, and administration costs goes to the Repair Class. Members receive a pro rata share for each eligible repair, identified by the repair number in Costa's records. A repair must have cost more than $11.95 to qualify.
The preliminary approval order says that, based on current estimates of administration costs and fees, Purchase Class members are expected to receive about $51 per claim and Repair Class members about $42 per claim. For comparison, the order says the plaintiff's expert valued the nominal-fee promise at about $72.57 per purchase, and the weighted average repair price paid by Repair Class members was $84.52.
Class counsel will ask the court for $7,303,605 in attorneys' fees and expenses from the fund. Their motion breaks the request into $6,135,805.67 in fees, based on 8,800.5 hours of work with no multiplier, and $1,159,777.11 in litigation expenses.
Payments can be made by paper check, Venmo, PayPal, or Zelle. The administrator will email class members to choose, and anyone who does not choose gets a paper check. The agreement calls for payments within 37 days after the settlement's effective date. Uncashed payments expire after 60 days. If at least $150,000 is left over, a second distribution goes to people who cashed their first payment. Any final remainder goes to Captains for Clean Water, subject to court approval.
Estimates are not promises
The $51 and $42 figures are projections cited in the court's order. Actual payments depend on how many Purchase Class claims are approved, how many repairs qualify, and what fees the court awards.
Who is in the settlement classes
Purchase Class: All citizens of Florida who, between July 28, 2013 and January 31, 2018, bought non-prescription, non-promotional Costa sunglasses for personal use.
Repair Class: All citizens of Florida who bought non-prescription, non-promotional Costa sunglasses for personal use on or before January 31, 2018, and were charged a fee by Costa between July 28, 2012 and January 26, 2025 to replace damaged components.
Both classes are limited to Florida citizens. Prescription sunglasses and promotional sunglasses are not covered. Costa, its controlled entities and their officers, directors, and employees, and the judge and court staff are excluded.
If you belong to both classes, you take part only as a Repair Class member. The court approved these definitions as a slight modification of the classes it certified in 2019, which looked back four years for purchases and five years for repairs from the original filing.
How to claim and your other options
Repair Class members do not need to file anything. The administrator will use Costa's repair records to identify qualifying repairs. Costa keeps email, phone, and mailing details for repair customers, according to the preliminary approval order, so watch for an email or postcard notice.
Purchase Class members must file a claim online at CostaSunglassLitigation.com by January 11, 2027, or mail a claim form postmarked by that date to Haney v Costa Del Mar, Inc. Settlement Administrator, PO Box 4153, Portland, OR 97208-4153. You may claim up to five purchases without proof. The administrator may require supporting documentation for more than five.
Opt out. Mail a signed exclusion request with the case name, your name and address, and a statement that you want to be excluded, postmarked by January 19, 2027. You cannot opt out by phone or email. You get no payment but keep your right to sue Costa separately.
Object. If you stay in, you can file a written objection with the Clerk of the Fourth Judicial Circuit, 501 W. Adams St., Jacksonville, FL 32202, by January 19, 2027, and mail copies to class counsel and Costa's counsel postmarked by that date. The notice lists the required contents.
Do nothing. Repair Class members still get paid. Purchase Class members get nothing. Either way, you give up the right to sue over the released claims.
Questions go to info@CostaSunglassLitigation.com or 1-833-558-0945.
Mail early
The settlement notice warns that mail may not be postmarked the day you drop it off. It recommends mailing at least a week before a postmark deadline, getting a manual postmark at a post office, or using Certified Mail.
How this differs from the Smith and Reed cases
Costa has faced two related lawsuits, and the settlement agreement describes a "global resolution" of all three.
The Smith settlement is separate and has its own website, CostaSunglassWarrantySettlement.com. That $4,095,000 settlement covers U.S. citizens nationwide who bought non-prescription Costa sunglasses before January 1, 2016 and paid Costa a warranty fee from August 20, 2013 to February 29, 2020 to fix damage caused by a manufacturer's defect. Its website says the opt-out and objection deadline was October 8, 2026, and its final approval hearing is set for January 20, 2027.
The Haney case is different. It is limited to Florida citizens and concerns the "nominal fee" for damage from accident, normal wear and tear, or misuse.
The third case, Reed v. Costa Del Mar, Inc., No. 6:19-cv-01751, is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, according to the Haney settlement agreement. This article did not review a separate Reed settlement notice.
Timeline
- July 12, 2017: Haney's lawyers send Costa a pre-suit notice letter, according to the complaint.
- July 28, 2017: Original class action complaint filed in Duval County.
- February 2, 2018: Second amended complaint, the operative complaint, filed.
- April 12, 2019: Court certifies purchase and repair classes. Costa appeals on May 10, 2019.
- March 3, 2020: Haney's claims are consolidated into the federal Smith case, according to the fee motion.
- 2024: The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit vacates an earlier combined settlement in Smith v. Miorelli, finding a lack of federal jurisdiction over certain injunctive relief claims.
- September 30, 2024: Stay lifted and the Haney case resumes in state court.
- July 14, 2025: Deadline to opt out of the certified class.
- January 2026: Trial begins and ends in a mistrial, according to the settlement agreement.
- April 2, 2026: Parties agree on settlement terms.
- September 22, 2026: Preliminary approval order e-filed.
- October 12, 2026: Summary notice published.
- January 11, 2027: Purchase Class claim deadline.
- January 19, 2027: Opt-out and objection deadline.
- March 23, 2027: Final approval hearing at the Duval County Courthouse, 501 West Adams Street, Jacksonville.
Browse other cases you can join.
What remains uncertain
The court has not decided whether Costa's box language was a warranty, whether its repair fees exceeded a nominal amount, or what a nominal fee is. The settlement resolves the case without answering those questions, and Costa admits no liability.
Final approval is not guaranteed. The judge could reject the settlement or reduce the fee request, and appeals could delay payments, which come only after the settlement becomes final. The notice says the hearing date could change.
The fee figures do not match exactly. The notice lists $7,303,605, while the fee motion's fee and expense amounts total $7,295,582.78. The motion says it excludes time spent on settlement approval and reserves the right to update its request.
The current notice does not address people who opted out of the certified class by July 14, 2025. The earlier version of the settlement website said those people would not receive any money later awarded. Anyone in that situation should contact the administrator.
Frequently asked questions
Who qualifies for the Costa sunglasses settlement?
Florida citizens who bought non-prescription, non-promotional Costa sunglasses for personal use from July 28, 2013 through January 31, 2018, or who were charged a Costa repair fee from July 28, 2012 through January 26, 2025 for sunglasses bought on or before January 31, 2018. A repair must have cost more than $11.95 to be paid.
Do I need to file a claim?
Only if you are in the Purchase Class. Repair Class members are paid automatically from Costa's repair records. If you are in both classes, you are treated as a Repair Class member.
How much money will I get?
There is no fixed amount. The court's order cites estimates of about $51 per Purchase Class claim and about $42 per Repair Class claim, but final amounts depend on claims and court-approved fees.
What is the deadline to file a claim?
January 11, 2027, online or by mail postmarked by that date. The opt-out and objection deadline is January 19, 2027.
Is this the same as the Smith Costa warranty settlement?
No. Smith is a separate $4,095,000 nationwide settlement over fees for manufacturer's-defect repairs. Haney covers only Florida citizens and fees for damage from accident, wear and tear, or misuse.
Did Costa admit wrongdoing?
No. Costa denies all wrongdoing and liability, and the court has made no finding that Costa violated any law.