/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/120124.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Tuesday, January 24, 2012, Vol. 14, No. 17 Headlines 012 SMILE: Receives Motion for Recognition of Class Action ABC: Former Bachelor Contestants Mull Class Action BANK OF THE OZARKS: Faces Overdraft Fee-Related Suit in Arkansas EMPIRE SCAFFOLD: Faces Class Action Over Bonus Pay NAT'L FOOTBALL LEAGUE: Locks Law Firm Files Class Action PROVINCE OF OAKALLA, CANADA: Class Action Settlement Tossed SECURITIES AMERICA: Distributes $80-Mil. Ponzi Scheme Settlement SHELL VACATIONS: Sued Over False Claims on Timeshare Memberships SIEMENS HEARING: Hausfeld Files Securities Class Action in N.J. SIX FLAGS: Faces Class Action Over 2088 Norovirus Outbreak ST. JOSEPH'S HOSPITAL: Ex-Workers Seek $10.8MM in Class Action STATE OF MINNESOTA: Sued for Violating Genetic Privacy Act TRAILER BRIDGE: Puerto Rico-Related Antitrust Suits Pending WARREN COUNTY, OH: Another Plaintiff to Be Added in Class Action WINN-DIXIE STORES: Recalls Leasa Sprouts Due to Salmonella Risk * Securities Fraud Class Action Filings Up Slightly in 2011 ********* 012 SMILE: Receives Motion for Recognition of Class Action ---------------------------------------------------------- Partner Communications Company Ltd. on Jan. 19 disclosed that its fully owned subsidiary, 012 Smile Telecom Ltd., was served with a lawsuit and a motion for the recognition of this lawsuit as a class action, filed against 012 Smile and other telecommunication operators on January 11, 2012, in the Nazareth District Court. The claim alleges that the defendants operate certain information and premium services through international dialing codes and apply tariffs, not in accordance with their licenses and the regulation requirements applicable to such services. The total amount claimed against 012 Smile, if the lawsuit is recognized as a class action is not estimated by the plaintiff. 012 Smile is reviewing and assessing the lawsuit and 012 Smile and Partner are unable, at this preliminary stage, to evaluate, with any degree of certainty, the probability of success of the lawsuit or the range of potential exposure, if any. About Partner Communications Partner Communications Company Ltd. is an Israeli provider of telecommunications services (cellular, fixed-line telephony and Internet services) under the orange(TM) brand. The Company provides mobile communications services to over 3 million subscribers in Israel. Partner's ADSs are quoted on the NASDAQ Global Select Market(TM) and its shares are traded on the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange (nasdaq and tase:PTNR). Partner is an approximately 45%-owned subsidiary of Scailex Corporation Ltd. About 012 Smile Telecom Ltd. 012 Smile is a wholly owned subsidiary of Partner Communications which provides international long distance services, Internet services and local telecommunication fixed-line services (including telephony services using VOB) under the 012 Smile brand. The completion of the purchase of 012 Smile by Partner Communications took place on March 3, 2011. ABC: Former Bachelor Contestants Mull Class Action -------------------------------------------------- Cupids Pulse reports that in a move that would be the first-of- its-kind in reality television history, former contestants of the ABC hit reality television shows, "The Bachelor" and "The Bachelorette" have spoken to attorneys and are in discussion to file a class action lawsuit, against creators Mike Fleiss and Elan Gale. This information was disclosed to us in an exclusive interview by former contestant and "Bachelorette Season 4" winner, Jesse Csincsak. "Once you're on the show, they own you," Mr. Csincsak said. "Even when your contract is up, they still interfere in your life and prevent you from promoting other brands and making money." Mr. Csincsak notes that the last straw for him came when Gale contacted his business partners and other companies telling them not to work with him. He says that the producers have also contacted former "Bachelor," "Bachelorette" and "Bachelor Pad" contestants threatening to blacklist them if they participate in any of Mr. Csincsak's events. Since appearing on "The Bachelorette" Mr. Csincsak has remained in the spotlight by hosting annual bachelor reunion gatherings with the former contestants and most recently he launched the successful web show "Reality Smackdown." Discussion about a class action lawsuit surfaced this month after Mr. Csincsak was reviewing his rights with his attorneys. "I had planned to file my own lawsuit last month but after discussions with numerous people and former Bachelor contestants, we realized that this issue is much bigger than me," he said. This isn't the first time ABC has been to court regarding the hit show. In 2003, the show's producers filed suit against former "Bachelor" Season 4 star, Bob Guiney for breaking his contract by promoting his new CD "3 Sides," and his music video. Mr. Guiney won the case. Last month, spoiler blogger, Steve Carbone (a.k.a Reality Steve) was slapped with a lawsuit by the producers of ABC for coercing former contestants to breach their confidentiality contracts to help reveal spoiler activities for his Web site. Mr. Csincsak, a retired pro snowboarder, who won the heart of DeAnna Pappas on Season 4 of "The Bachelorette" is now married to former "Bachelor" Season 13 contestant Ann Leuders. BANK OF THE OZARKS: Faces Overdraft Fee-Related Suit in Arkansas ---------------------------------------------------------------- Bank of the Ozarks, Inc., is facing a class action lawsuit in Arkansas alleging improper assessment and collection of excessive overdraft fees, according to the Company's January 18, 2012, Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. On January 5, 2012, the Company and its subsidiary, Bank of the Ozarks (the "Bank"), were served with a summons and complaint filed on December 19, 2011, in the Circuit Court of Lonoke County, Arkansas, Division III, styled Robert Walker, Ann B. Hines and Judith Belk vs. Bank of the Ozarks, Inc. and Bank of the Ozarks, No. CV-2011-777. The complaint alleges that the defendants have harmed the plaintiffs, former customers of the Bank, by improper, unfair and unconscionable assessment and collection of excessive overdraft fees from the plaintiffs. According to the complaint, plaintiffs claim that the Bank employs sophisticated software to automate its overdraft system, and that this system unfairly and inequitably manipulates and alters customers' transaction records in order to maximize overdraft penalties, particularly utilizing a practice of posting of items in "high-to-low" order, despite the actual sequence in which such items are presented for payment. Plaintiffs claim that the Bank's deposit agreements with customers do not adequately disclose the Bank's overdraft assessment policies and are ambiguous, deceptive, unfair and misleading. Plaintiffs' complaint also alleges that these actions and omissions constitute breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unconscionable conduct, conversion, unjust enrichment and violation of the Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act. The plaintiffs seek to have the case certified by the court as a class action for all Bank account holders similarly situated, and seek a declaratory judgment as to the wrongful nature of the Bank's overdraft fee policies, restitution of overdraft fees paid by the plaintiffs and the putative class as a result of the actions cited in the complaint, disgorgement of profits as a result of the alleged wrongful actions and unspecified compensatory and punitive damages, together with pre-judgment interest, costs and plaintiffs' attorneys' fees. The Company and the Bank have not yet responded to the complaint, but believe that the plaintiffs' claims are without merit and intend to vigorously contest their claims. EMPIRE SCAFFOLD: Faces Class Action Over Bonus Pay -------------------------------------------------- David Yates, writing for The Southeast Texas Record, reports that individually, and on behalf of those similarly situated, Jorge Garcia has filed a class action lawsuit against Empire Scaffold, alleging the company owes him and others for bonus pay for work at Motiva's expansion project. The suit was filed Jan. 12 in Jefferson County District Court and claims the amount in controversy does not exceed $5 million for all class members. According to the lawsuit, Empire Scaffold employed several hundred people to work at the Motiva Crude Expansion Project at its Port Arthur refinery. The job was a massive undertaking and required "ramp up" and "step down" labor over a number of years. As peak labor demand waned, so did the desire to work the project. Accordingly, Motiva and its contractors instituted a program entitling workers to a deferred additional pay bonus in the face of inevitable layoffs. The additional bonus pay included $1 per hour for straight time and $1.50 for overtime for all helpers and labors. All other crafts would be paid $2 for straight time and $3 for overtime, the suit states. In December 2011, Mr. Garcia was part of a reduction in force but did not receive the agreed upon compensation. In addition to his back pay, Mr. Garcia is seeking exemplary damages. Beaumont attorney John Werner of the Reaud, Morgan & Quinn law firm represents him. Judge Milton Shuffield, 136th District Court, is assigned to the case. Case No. D191-658 Mr. Werner can be reached at: John Werner, Esq. REAUD, MORGAN & QUINN, L.L.P. 801 Laurel Street Beaumont, TX 77701 Telephone: (409) 838-1000 NAT'L FOOTBALL LEAGUE: Locks Law Firm Files Class Action -------------------------------------------------------- Locks Law Firm attorneys Gene Locks, Michael Leh, and David Langfitt filed a class action lawsuit on Jan. 18 in Philadelphia against the NFL on behalf of all former NFL players, including seven named players and four spouses, all of whom are the class representatives. The named players include former Philadelphia Eagles Ron Solt, Joe Panos, and Rich Miano. The suit charges that the NFL and other defendants intentionally and fraudulently misrepresented and/or concealed medical evidence about the short- and long-term risks regarding repetitive traumatic brain injury and concussions and failed to warn players that they risked permanent brain damage if they returned to play too soon after sustaining a concussion. Ron Solt, age 50, was an all-star guard for the Eagles from 1988 to 1991 and also played for the Indianapolis Colts, playing 10 seasons in all from 1984 to 1993. He suffered at least one concussion during an NFL game while with the Eagles, as well as multiple head traumas and concussions during practice that were never medically diagnosed. He now suffers from substantial memory loss and persistent ringing in his ears. Joe Panos, age 41, played as an offensive lineman in the NFL from 1994 to 2000 and was with the Eagles from 1994 to 1997. He sustained concussions while with the Eagles and Buffalo Bills. He currently experiences headaches, memory loss, irritability, rage, mood swings, and, sleeplessness. Rich Miano, age 49, played as a defensive back for 10 seasons in the NFL between 1985 and 1995 and was with the Eagles from 1991 to 1994. He is now associate head coach of the University of Hawaii football team. He sustained at least one concussion while playing but is currently asymptomatic. Gennaro DiNapoli, age 36, was an NFL center and guard from 1998 to 2004 who sustained repeated head impacts during his NFL career. He suffers from severe depression, memory loss, headaches, anxiety and mood swings. Adam Haayer, age 34, was an offensive lineman from 2001 to 2006 for four teams. He had at least four concussions or concussion- like symptoms and deals with memory loss, depression, and anxiety. Daniel Buenning, age 30, played as an offensive lineman in the NFL for four seasons from 2005 to 2008. He suffers from substantial memory loss, depression, trouble with concentration, short attention span, and mood swings. Craig Heimburger, age 34, played on the offensive line for four teams between 1999 and 2002. He sustained multiple head impacts and concussions and suffers from dizziness, memory loss, and intense headaches. Also named in the complaints were the wives of several players including Lori Miano, Summer Haayer, Ashley Buenning, and Dawn Heimburger. "This action is necessary because the NFL knew about the debilitating and permanent effects of head injuries and concussions that regularly occur among professional players, yet ignored and actively concealed the risks," according to Locks. The suit from Locks Law attorneys Gene Locks, Michael Leh and David Langfitt charges that the NFL voluntarily joined the scientific research as well as public and private discussions regarding the relationship between concussions and brain impairment when it created the Mild Traumatic Brain Injury (MTBI) Committee in 1994. Rather than naming a noted neurologist to chair this committee, it appointed Dr. Elliott Pellman, a rheumatologist who was a paid physician and trainer for the New York Jets, a conflict of interest, and had training in the treatment of joints and muscles, not head injuries. While the committee was established with the stated purpose of researching and lessening the impact of concussions on NFL players, it failed to inform them of the true risks associated with head trauma. "Although athletes who suffered brain trauma in other professional sports were restricted from playing full games or even seasons, NFL players with similar head injuries were regularly returned to play with devastating consequences," according to Locks. The suit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. It seeks medical monitoring, compensation, and financial recovery for the short-term, long-term, and chronic injuries, financial and intangible losses, and expenses for the individual former and present NFL players and their spouses. Locks Law Firm also plans to file additional suits on behalf of other NFL players in the upcoming weeks. With a litigation team of 23 personal injury attorneys and nearly 100 legal professionals and auxiliary staff members, Locks Law Firm -- http://www.lockslaw.com-- serves plaintiffs and is dedicated to victims of corporate neglect and malfeasance. The firm has offices in Philadelphia, New York, Cherry Hill, NJ. The Plaintiffs' lawyers can be reached at: Gene Locks, Esq. Michael Leh, Esq. David Langfitt, Esq. LOCKS LAW FIRM The Curtis Center 601 Walnut Street, Suite 720 East Philadelphia, PA 19106 PROVINCE OF OAKALLA, CANADA: Class Action Settlement Tossed ----------------------------------------------------------- Charmaine de Silva, writing for Vancouver/CKNW(AM980), reports that sexual abuse victims from the old Oakalla Prison Farm in Burnaby will not have a class action settlement with the Province. This, after a Judge dismissed the agreement's terms. Lawyer Jim Poyner says the Judge didn't like the limitation period the settlement placed on victims. But, what happens to victims now, depends on whether there's an appeal, "Whether there's an appeal or not, I can't say at this stage. But if there isn't and if nothing happens, then where they're left is they're gonna have to go to Court and present their case and try to find a resolution that way." Mr. Poyner says going to Court would open victims to a serious loss of privacy, and also come at a major financial cost. Mr. Poyner can be reached at: Baxter LLP #408-145 Chadwick Court North Vancouver, BC V7M 3K1 Telephone: (604) 210-3651 SECURITIES AMERICA: Distributes $80-Mil. Ponzi Scheme Settlement ---------------------------------------------------------------- The law firm of Girard Gibbs LLP on Jan. 19 announced that two years after bringing a class action case against Securities America, Inc., its corporate parent Securities America Financial Corporation and Ameriprise Financial, Inc., over 2,000 investors throughout the U.S. are receiving checks totaling $80 million. Investors will recover an average of over $30,000 per person. The distribution represents the last chapter of a lawsuit filed by Securities America customers who purchased private placement investments in Medical Capital Notes and Provident Royalties, which were both revealed to be Ponzi schemes. Girard Gibbs and associated counsel represented the investors and won final approval of the $80 million settlement in Federal District Court in Dallas, Texas on July 25, 2011. "We are pleased that our clients will recover a substantial percentage of their losses within two years of the date this litigation got underway," said Daniel Girard, senior partner at Girard Gibbs. "We commend our adversaries for coming to the settlement table in good faith and negotiating a fair compromise with all the affected investors." The settlement allows investors to recoup losses independent of any recovery obtained through receiverships. In July 2009, the SEC formally charged Provident Royalties LLC, Provident Asset Management LLC and its founders with securities fraud in connection with an alleged $485 million Ponzi scheme to defraud natural gas and oil investors. The SEC civil complaint charges that Provident made a series of fraudulent offerings of preferred stock and limited partnership interests and sold them to approximately 7,700 investors. It is alleged that Provident promised investors annual returns of up to 18 percent from investments in oil and gas real estate, leases, and mineral rights, but failed to disclose that a significant portion of investors' funds were being used to pay previous investors. The class action lawsuit alleged, among other things, that private placement memoranda for the Medical Capital offerings misrepresented and omitted material facts, and that the defendants violated federal securities laws. About Girard Gibbs LLP Girard Gibbs LLP -- http://www.GirardGibbs.com-- is a law firm that represents individual and institutional investors in securities fraud class actions and litigation. Mr. Gibbs can be reached at: Daniel Girard, Esq. Girard Gibbs LLP Telephone: (415) 981-4800 E-mail: dcg@girardgibbs.com SHELL VACATIONS: Sued Over False Claims on Timeshare Memberships ---------------------------------------------------------------- Nick McCann at Courthouse News Service reports that in a federal class action, investors say a timeshare company "sells false dreams" by charging thousands of dollars in hidden fees after luring in customers with false promises. The lead plaintiffs claim they spent $14,000 on Shell Vacations "club points" that they later saw members selling on eBay for $1. Lead plaintiff Megan Putnam sued Shall Vacations LLC dba Shall Vacations Club, Shell Holdings and SVC West. Ms. Putnam and Erin Medina claim Shell Vacations describes its timeshare memberships as a "fixed cost," though prices continually increase. Ms. Putnam and Ms. Medina say they paid thousands of dollars in maintenance fees. "Although plaintiffs purchased 2,500 points for approximately $14,224 (and thousands in hidden fees), there are numerous Shell Vacations members selling their Shell Vacations points on Ebay, as many as 9,700 points, for $1," the complaint states. "Plaintiffs and the class members are not provided the exclusive or priority access to the timeshare resorts they were promised. Rather, defendants, among other things, attempt to sell reservations to the timeshare resorts to non-members at a profit. As a result of this practice, the number of reservations available to members is significantly depleted, leaving fewer and less desirable timeshares for members to choose from and redeem their club points toward." The plaintiffs say an Internet search show "endless complaints nationwide" against Shell Vacations. "In the next 10 years we will be paying $50,000 to go on vacation 10 times, and that only covers the condo, not airfare, etc," one man wrote on an online complaint forum, according to the complaint. "How is that a great investment?" Another customer complained of "one unpleasant surprise after another" and "many lies and conveniently concealed information." Shell Vacations is a Delaware LLC that operates out of Northbrook, Ill., according to the complaint, which says its subsidiary, SVC- West, operates out of San Francisco. The class seeks punitive damages for breach of contract, breach of faith, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, false promises, deceptive business practices and violations of the Vacation Ownership and Time-Share Act. A copy of the Complaint in Putnam, et al. v. Shell Vacations LLC (d/b/a Shell Vacations Club, L.P.), et al., Case No. 12-cv-00242 (N.D. Calif.), is available at: http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/01/19/Timeshares.pdf The Plaintiffs are represented by: Robert C. Schubert, Esq. Willem F. Jonckheer, Esq. SCHUBERT JONCKHEER & KOLBE LLP Three Embarcadero Center, Suite 1650 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 788-4220 E-mail: rschubert@schubertlawfirm.com wjonckheer@schubertlawfirm.com - and - Thomas G. Shapiro, Esq. Michelle H. Blauner, Esq. Adam M. Stewart, Esq. SHAPIRO HABER & URMY LLP 53 State Street Boston, MA 02109 Telephone: (617) 439-3939 E-mail: tshapiro@shulaw.com mblauner@shulaw.com astewart@shulaw.com SIEMENS HEARING: Hausfeld Files Securities Class Action in N.J. --------------------------------------------------------------- Hausfeld LLP has filed a securities class action lawsuit on behalf of those who sold HearUSA common stock between January 18, 2011 and July 31, 2011, inclusive. The lawsuit, filed January 18, 2012, seeks to pursue remedies against Siemens Hearing Instruments, Inc. for violations of Sections 10(b), 9(a)(2) and 18(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 [15 U.S.C. 78j(b), 78i(a)(2), and 78r(a)] and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by the Securities and Exchange Commission [17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5]. Siemens is engaged, in part, in the manufacture of hearing products, and HearUSA was involved in the distribution of Siemens' hearing products. The complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey and is captioned MTB Investment Partners, LP vs. Siemens Hearing Instruments, Inc. The complaint alleges that Siemens engaged in a fraudulent scheme to drive down the price of HearUSA common stock in an attempt to acquire HearUSA's assets for less than their fair market value by, in part, filing false and misleading statements with the SEC. The result of Siemens' false and misleading statements, according to the complaint, was to drive down the market price of HearUSA common stock from 90c/share on January 18, 2011 to 35c/share on July 28, 2011. According to the complaint, Siemens made a number of false and/or misleading statements in its public filings which caused HearUSA stock to plummet. These public filings stated that Siemens at no point had the intention to acquire HearUSA, despite the fact that it had been in the advanced stages of a negotiated buyout process for HearUSA. The public filings further stated that Siemens, if it wanted to acquire HearUSA, could do so at no consideration to shareholders because of debts owed to Siemens by HearUSA. The complaint alleges that this assertion misrepresented the status and extent of the debt owed to Siemens by HearUSA and Siemens' ability to acquire HearUSA pursuant to the credit agreement entered into between the two companies. The complaint alleges that, in making these statements, Siemens effectively told the market that HearUSA stock was worthless, and that the market responded accordingly. The complaint further alleges: (1) that despite Siemens' best efforts, it was unable to acquire HearUSA for less than its fair market value; (2) that although HearUSA was driven into bankruptcy as a result of Siemens' actions, HearUSA was able to interest a Siemens' rival in its acquisition; (3) that as a result, Siemens eventually acquired HearUSA in August 2011 at its market value prior to Siemens' public filings (between 93c and $1.09/share); and (4) that as a result of Siemens' actions, many investors had sold HearUSA stock in the interim at greatly reduced prices. The lawsuit seeks recovery from Siemens on behalf of those investors. If you sold HearUSA common stock between January 18, 2011 and July 31, 2011, inclusive, and as a result sustained damages, you may move the court to serve as lead plaintiff of the Class no later than 60 days from today, if you so choose. A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to serve as lead plaintiff, however, you must meet certain legal requirements. The ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision of whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. You may retain Hausfeld LLP, or other counsel of your choice, to serve as your counsel in this action. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact plaintiff's counsel, William Butterfield of Hausfeld LLP at (202)540-7200 or via e-mail at wbutterfield@hausfeldllp.com Hausfeld LLP is an international firm specializing in claimant- side litigation. SIX FLAGS: Faces Class Action Over 2088 Norovirus Outbreak ---------------------------------------------------------- Jon Alexander, writing for The Post-Star, reports that attorneys representing more than 100 people filed a class-action lawsuit on Jan. 18 in state Supreme Court in Warren County against the Six Flags Great Escape Lodge & Indoor Waterpark over a 2008 norovirus outbreak. The state Department of Health documented more than 600 cases of norovirus in March 2008, apparently stemming from contaminated food and pool water at the park's hotel complex. "Here, many people, especially children, suffered brief but violent periods of illness," said Don Boyajian, one of two attorneys representing those who were infected. Those infected experienced brief but violent fits of vomiting and diarrhea. Dozens of people filed lawsuits following the incident. Those claims were consolidated into a single case -- the class-action lawsuit, which has been in the works since 2009. Mr. Boyajian did not specify the amount of damages being sought. He said damages would depend on the virus' impact on each individual. Attorneys representing Great Escape were not available on Jan. 18 for comment. Mr. Boyajian alleges that Great Escape, and its parent company Six Flags Inc., failed to maintain proper sanitary conditions and didn't warn guests once the outbreak became known. "Guests reported that entire floors of the hotel were sick," Mr. Boyajian said. "Yet, Six Flags continued to keep their doors open and charge admission." The outbreak resulted in the hotel and indoor water park temporarily closing two of its restaurants, installing hand- sanitizing stations and implementing more rigorous disinfection measures at its indoor water park. State Supreme Court Justice David Krogmann has ruled that anyone who experienced gastrointestinal illness while visiting the park during the outbreak, or within 72 hours of departing, can be party to the case. Mr. Boyajian can be reached at: Donald W. Boyajian, Esq. DREYER BOYAJIAN LLP 75 Columbia Street Albany, NY 12210 Telephone: (518) 478-2762 E-mail: dboyajian@dreyerboyajian.com ST. JOSEPH'S HOSPITAL: Ex-Workers Seek $10.8MM in Class Action -------------------------------------------------------------- Lawrence Smith, writing for The West Virginia Record, reports that plaintiffs in a class-action lawsuit against a Wood County hospital are asking they be awarded more than $10 million for lost benefits, and the hospital's former parent company put its remaining hospitals currently on the auction block up as collateral. Last year, nine former St. Joseph's Hospital employees -- Carole S. Caplinger, Carol S. Dearman, Earlene Workman, Mark Workman, Beverly J. Flanagan, Mary Kathleen Moore, Ed Rardin, Shannon M. Nelson and K.C. Stalnaker -- filed suit alleging they and their co-workers were not paid their accumulated sick leave following their termination from St. Joseph's prior to its merger with Camden-Clark Memorial Hospital. The two officially became Camden-Clark Medical Center on March 1, and is now an affiliate of West Virginia United Health System. Prior to the merger, St. Joseph's was owned by the Houston, Texas- based Signature Hospital Corporation, which is named as a co- defendant in the suit. In April, Wood Circuit Judge Robert A. Waters granted a motion by the employees' attorneys, Ginny A. Conley and George Cosenza, to give the suit class-action status so as to enable the remaining St. Joseph's employees the ability to become a party to it, and share in any proceeds. Records show, between 630 and 700 people are potential plaintiffs in the suit. In a filing made Nov. 16, Ms. Conley and Mr. Cosenza put a dollar amount they believe Signature owns their clients. They maintain all members of the class "are entitled to recover in excess of $10,800,000, plus attorneys' fees and costs." The dollar figure quoted came as part of a petition Ms. Conley and Mr. Cosenza made for an order of attachment. Believing Signature does have $10 million, they asked Judge Waters to "order a prejudgment attachment to any assets or property necessary to secure the expected recovery in this action until the litigation is completed." Specifically, they asked the attachment be made to the two remaining hospitals it owns in Texas, the Gulf Coast Medical Center in Wharton, and the Pampa Regional Medical Center. The petition came following a deposition taken of Steve Peterson, Signature's chief financial officer, and one if its general partners, that the company had intentions of selling the two facilities and possible suitors, but no firm commitments. In a response dated Nov. 23, Mr. Peterson asked that Judge Waters deny Conley and Cosenza's petition. In his response, he said an attachment would not only interfere with Signature's ability to sell the hospitals, but also "would result in substantial damage and undermine even what the Plaintiffs want to do in this case." As of presstime, Judge Waters had yet to rule on the petition. Trial in the case is scheduled to begin Monday, Jan. 30. Wood Circuit Court case number 11-C-98 Ms. Conley can be reached at: Ginny Conley, Esq. CONLEY LAW OFFICE 610 Market Street, Suite 3 Parkersburg, WV 26101 Telephone: (304) 485-3333 Mr. Cosenza can be reached at: George Cosenza, Esq. Parkersburg, WV 26102 Telephone: (304) 485-0990 STATE OF MINNESOTA: Sued for Violating Genetic Privacy Act ---------------------------------------------------------- Dionne Cordell-Whitney at Courthouse News Service reports that Minnesota collects DNA samples from newborn children, then illegally keeps the genetic information and shares it with third parties without informed consent of the parents, parents say in a class action. Lead plaintiffs Nathan and Katrina Anderson sued the state, the Minnesota Department of Health, and its commissioner, in Hennepin County Court. They claim that the state violated its own Genetic Privacy Act by collecting, storing and disseminating their children's genetic information without informed consent. The Genetic Privacy Act took effect Aug. 1, 2006. "Under Minnesota's 'Newborn Screening' program, within five days of each minor plaintiff's birth . . . defendants removed blood from each minor plaintiff, which contains the genetic information of the minor plaintiff," the complaint states. "Defendants similarly collect a sample of genetic information from all babies born in Minnesota. "Blood from the minor plaintiffs contains genetic information from the minor plaintiff and its biological parents." The state tests the infants' blood for "disorders," according to the complaint. However, "After testing the minor plaintiffs' blood for disorders, defendants did not destroy the blood sample, but instead stored or retained the blood sample," the complaint states. The parents say the state did this without their informed consent, and that the state then "disseminated the genetic information, and conducted tests and research on the genetic information belonging to numerous other persons in Minnesota," also without consent. The parents say that state's Genetic Privacy Act was enacted to protect the "genetic privacy and the DNA property rights of all Minnesotans, including newborns." "The Genetic Privacy Act states that genetic information may be used only for the purposes for which an individual has given written and informed consent, may be stored only for the period of time that the individual has given written informed consent, and may not be disseminated without an individual's written informed consent," according to the complaint. It adds: "The MNDOH and the State, through and under the direction of the Commissioner shared and disseminated the plaintiffs' genetic information with third-parties without obtaining plaintiffs' informed written consent." They seek damages and punitive damages. A copy of the Complaint in Anderson, et al. v. State of Minnesota, et al., Case No. _____ (Minn. Dist. Ct., Hennepin Cty.), is available at: http://www.courthousenews.com/2012/01/19/Genetic.pdf The Plaintiffs are represented by: Stephen J. Foley, Esq. Jeffrey D. Klobucar, Esq. Jared D. Kemper, Esq. FOLEY & MANSFIELD, PLLP 250 Marquette Avenue, Suite 1200 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Telephone: (612) 338-8788 E-mail: sfoley@foleymansfield.com jklobucar@foleymansfield.com jkemper@foleymansfield.com - and - John R. Climaco, Esq. Scott D. Simpkins, Esq. Patrick G. Warner, Esq. CLIMACO, WILCOX, PECA, TARANTINO & GAROFOLI CO., LPA 55 Public Square, Suite 1950 Cleveland, OH 44113 Telephone: (216) 621-8484 E-mail: jrclim@climacolaw.com sdsimp@climacolaw.com pgwarn@climacolaw.com TRAILER BRIDGE: Puerto Rico-Related Antitrust Suits Pending ----------------------------------------------------------- Antitrust lawsuits that previously involved Trailer Bridge, Inc., remain pending, according to the Company's January 18, 2012, Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. On April 17, 2008, Trailer Bridge, Inc. received a subpoena from the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice (the "DOJ") seeking documents and information relating to a criminal grand jury investigation of alleged anti-competitive conduct by Puerto Rico ocean carriers. The Company representatives have met with United States Justice Department attorneys and pledged its full and complete cooperation with the DOJ investigation. The Company has made document submissions to the DOJ in response to the subpoena. Neither the Company nor any of its employees has been charged with any wrongdoing in this investigation and will continue to cooperate with government officials. Following publicity about the DOJ investigation, beginning on April 22, 2008, shippers in the Puerto Rico trade lane, and in one case indirect consumer purchasers within Puerto Rico, have filed at least 40 purported class actions against domestic ocean carriers, including Horizon Lines, Sea Star Lines, Crowley Liner Services and the Company. The actions alleged that the defendants inflated prices and engaged in other allegedly anti-competitive conduct in violation of federal antitrust laws and seek treble damages, attorneys' fees and injunctive relief. The actions, which were filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, and the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico, were consolidated into a single multi-district litigation proceeding (MDL 1960) in the District of Puerto Rico for pretrial purposes. The Company filed a motion to dismiss the last operative consolidated complaint with the court. On April 30, 2010, in a non-final order, the court granted the Company's motion to be dismissed with prejudice as to the claims of the named plaintiffs. The order became final and non-appealable in the third quarter of 2011. Horizon Lines, Crowley Liner Services, Sea Star Lines, LLC, Saltchuck Resources, an affiliate of Sea Star Lines, LLC, and their related companies entered into settlement agreements with certain named direct purchaser plaintiffs on behalf of a purported class of claimants in the MDL 1960 proceeding, while denying any liability for the underlying claims. Plaintiffs who have opted-out are likely to pursue claims against the settling defendants. It is not clear whether an individual opt-out plaintiff would attempt to bring an action against the Company in such a proceeding or even whether they could do so in light of the Company's dismissal with prejudice from the underlying MDL. Moreover, it is not clear what, if any, impact these settlements, whether or not finally approved, will have on further prosecution of the MDL 1960 or other claims on the Company, or on the trade, in general. Although legal fees have been substantially reduced in 2011, significant legal fees and costs could still be incurred in connection with the DOJ investigation, the class actions, and other related matters. During the three month periods ended June 30, 2011, and 2010, costs were approximately $9,400 and $145,500, respectively. During the six month periods ended June 30, 2011, and 2010, costs were approximately $34,600 and $525,400, respectively. On October 15, 2009, the Company commenced legal action against its insurer for a judicial declaration that the insurer owes and has breached its duty to defend the Company in an antitrust lawsuit captioned: "In re Puerto Rican Cabotage Antitrust Litigation", U.S.D.C., Puerto Rico, Case No. 3:08-md-01960-DRD (MDL 1960), and for judgment requiring the insurer to defend and to reimburse the Company's defense expenses. The case was held in the Middle District of Florida, Jacksonville Division, and was captioned: "Trailer Bridge, Inc. v. Illinois National Insurance Debtor". On July 23, 2010, the court denied the Company's motion and granted summary judgment in favor of the defendant. The Company appealed this decision to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals on August 19, 2010. The district court decision was upheld on appeal and the Company chose not to seek appeal to the United States Supreme Court. The Company says it is not able to predict the ultimate outcome or cost of the DOJ investigation, the civil class actions, or other related matters. However, should this result in an unfavorable outcome for the Company or continued legal expense, it could have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial position and future operations. WARREN COUNTY, OH: Another Plaintiff to Be Added in Class Action ---------------------------------------------------------------- Michael Gossum, writing for WBKO, reports that a local attorney is adding another person to his case. Gary Logsdon plans to file for another plaintiff to be added to his class action suit. Mr. Logsdon is adding Ronda Keabler to his argument after she claimed to have a social security disabilities check taken from her while an inmate in Warren County Regional Jail. "I didn't sign a power of attorney or anything for the jail to use my signature, so I didn't think it was right," said Ms. Keabler. "There is nothing legal about taking a check from an individual and endorsing that check without that's person authorization or authority, permission or otherwise," said Mr. Logsdon. Mr. Logsdon filed the class action suit in December claiming the jail was unlawfully endorsing and misusing inmates checks. Now, the newest part of his case deals with a federal check. "The benefits are sacrosanct. They are strictly for the person to whom the checks are directed," said Mr. Logsdon. Mr. Logsdon cites his argument in a law pertaining to the social security act that congress passed more than 70 years ago. "They are not to be intercepted, they are not to be seized, not to be executed on, not to be garnished, not to be taken in anyway," said Mr. Logsdon. Local attorney Mike Breen who deals with social security cases said a judge is going to have to make a decision. "Is there some law, regulation, or rule that would allow a jailer to take any sort of a check from an inmate, and place into a commissary fund or to a bank account, and if there is no such law or regulation, then what is the legal basis for the jailer doing that," said Mr. Breen. Both Mr. Logsdon and Ms. Keabler believe the jail is overstepping its authority. "I just think that they take their authority to an extreme in there," said Ms. Keabler. WBKO contacted Jailer Jackie Strode, who said he could not comment due to pending litigation. The Social Security Administration's public affairs office in Atlanta responded to the issue saying "only the persons name whose name is on the social security check can cash the check." Also, it said if anyone has concerns with social security checks to contact them immediately at 1-800-772-1213. Mr. Logsdon can be reached at: Gary Logsdon, Esq. GARY S. LOGSDON AND ASSOCIATES Main Cross St. Bowling Green, KY 42102 Telephone: (270) 597-2134 Mr. Breen can be reached at: Mike Breen, Esq. MIKE BREEN ATTORNEY AT LAW, P.S.C. 870 Fairview Avenue, Suite 5 Bowling Green, KY 42101 Telephone: (270) 782-3030 WINN-DIXIE STORES: Recalls Leasa Sprouts Due to Salmonella Risk --------------------------------------------------------------- Tess Stynes at Dow Jones Newswires reports that Winn-Dixie Stores Inc. is voluntarily recalling some Leasa brand sprouts due to potential exposure to salmonella. Winn-Dixie, which operates about 480 retail grocery stores in the Southeast, said as a precautionary measure it will recall Leasa's broccoli sprouts, gourmet sprouts, spicy sprouts and onion sprouts from all of its stores. The recall affects sprouts sold from January 7 to January 18 with expiration dates between February 1 and March 15. Salmonella is an organism that can cause serious and sometimes fatal infections in young children, elderly people or others with weakened immune systems. It is the third recall in less than two months for the Company. Winn-Dixie last month recalled its store-brand Italian green beans because of the potential for peanuts mixed in with the green beans, posing a potential allergy risk for some people. It also recalled a brand of gummy candies sold in five of its stores amid the potential risk of metal contamination. Products at closely held Leasa Industries Inc. include fresh vegetables, sprouts, tofu and noodles and won ton wrappers. The products are distributed to retailers in Florida, Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina, Tennessee, the Caribbean and Alaska, according to Leasa's Web site. Winn-Dixie, which has stores in Florida, Alabama, Louisiana, Georgia and Mississippi, said it hasn't received any reports of illness related to the sprouts. Last month, grocery-store operator BI-LO LLC agreed to take Winn- Dixie Stores Inc. private in a deal that values the grocery chain at about $560 million. * Securities Fraud Class Action Filings Up Slightly in 2011 ----------------------------------------------------------- Federal securities fraud class action filing activity increased slightly in 2011, according to Securities Class Action Filings-- 2011 Year in Review, a semiannual report prepared by the Stanford Law School Securities Class Action Clearinghouse in cooperation with Cornerstone Research. A total of 188 federal securities class actions were filed in 2011 compared with 176 filings in 2010, with an equal number of actions (94) being filed in the first and second halves of the year. The number of class actions filed was 3.1 percent below the annual average of 194 filings observed between 1997 and 2010. Consistent with a trend first observed in 2010, filings related to merger and acquisition (M&A) transactions continued to constitute a large percentage of total filings, accounting for 22.9 percent of 2011 activity. There were 20 such filings in the first half of 2011 and 23 filings in the last six months of the year. In 2010, M&A filings constituted 22.7 percent of all filings. Litigation against Chinese issuers listed on U.S. exchanges through reverse mergers represented a major component of filings activity during 2011, although evidence indicates that this type of litigation is subsiding. In 2011, 33 such actions were filed, constituting 17.6 percent of all federal securities class actions. This activity occurred predominantly in the first half of the year, when 24 of these actions were filed; only nine were brought in the last six months, including five filed in the last three months of the year. In contrast, there were only nine such cases filed during 2010, suggesting both a rapid peak and decline in this type of litigation activity. Compared to other class action securities fraud complaints, Chinese reverse merger filings are more likely to allege violations of generally accepted accounting principles and financial restatements and are less likely to allege insider trading. The number of filings related to the credit crisis continued to decline. There were only three such filings in 2011, a decrease from 13 in 2010 and 53 in 2009. Overall filings in the financial sector also decreased, as financial companies were defendants in 13.3 percent of filings in 2011 compared with 24.4 percent in 2010. The Heat Maps of S&P 500 Securities Litigation(TM) show that in 2011, only 1.2 percent of S&P 500 companies in the Financials sector were named defendants in a class action compared with 11.7 percent, the 10-year historical average ending December 2010. These companies represented 6.9 percent of the Financials sector's market capitalization, well below the historical average of 24.3 percent. There also was very little activity in the Health Care sector of the S&P 500 in 2011, with only 2.0 percent of Health Care companies subject to new filings. A notable development in 2011 was the finalization of the rules of the Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Program. The SEC published its annual report on the Dodd-Frank Whistleblower Program in November 2011, indicating that the SEC had received 334 tips since the rules were finalized on August 12, 2011. These tips spanned 37 states and 11 different foreign countries. About 9.6 percent of the tips received were related to tips involving foreign companies. The market capitalization declines associated with end-of-class- period announcements have increased from 2010 levels but remain below the historic average. The total Disclosure Dollar Loss (DDL) of $106 billion in 2011 represented a 47.2 percent increase from 2010 but remained 17.8 percent below the average of $129 billion observed between 1997 and 2010. There were four "mega DDL" filings in 2011 associated with end-of-class market capitalization losses exceeding $5 billion. These filings represented 58.9 percent of the DDL Index(TM) in 2011. The total Maximum Dollar Loss (MDL) of $493 billion in 2011 was 4.0 percent above the total MDL in 2010 and 27.5 percent below $680 billion, the average MDL observed between 1997 and 2010. The number of "mega MDL" filings with losses of more than $10 billion decreased in number in 2011 but increased in dollar value. Nine mega MDL filings represented 80.2 percent of the MDL Index(TM) in 2011, while 14 mega MDL filings represented 79.1 percent of the MDL Index(TM) in 2010. Commentary Professor Joseph Grundfest, Director of the Stanford Law School Securities Class Action Clearinghouse in cooperation with Cornerstone Research: "This corner of the litigation market continues to run at a pace well below historic norms. The rapid run-up and subsequent decline of litigation against Chinese issuers that entered the U.S. market through reverse mergers suggest that this form of litigation may be close to having run its course. The decline in financial crisis claims further depressed the overall statistics. It's only the growth of merger-related litigation, which has historically been brought in state courts, that inflates the aggregate statistics so that they even approach historic norms. Taken together, these data suggest that there are far fewer claims of traditional securities fraud by U.S. issuers than has been the case since the mid-1990s." Dr. John Gould, Senior Vice President of Cornerstone Research: "While the number of securities class action filings in 2011 increased slightly compared with 2010, the number of filings and the associated market capitalization losses are still well below historical levels. Filings related to the financial crisis have continued to decrease, but we are seeing increases in the number of M&A filings. The upward trend of Chinese reverse merger filings peaked in the first half of 2011 and now appears to be dissipating." "At mid-year, I noted that 'We saw the lowest level of class action filing activity in S&P 500 companies since we began tracking this sector of the market in 2000.' This remained true when all filings for the year were examined. The two historically most active sectors of the S&P 500, Financials and Health Care, had the fewest number of new filings compared with any year between 2000 and 2010." Key Findings -- In the second half of 2011, the median lag between the end of the alleged class period and the filing date of the lawsuit rose to 20 days, more than double the median lag of nine days in the first half of 2011. This represented the first increase in median lag since the second half of 2009. Despite the increase, it is still below the historical median lag of 27 days for the 14 years ending December 2010. This increase is associated with an increase in the number of filings with a six-month or longer lag. -- The total number of unique issuers, whose exchange-traded securities were involved in class actions, increased by 13.3 percent. Multiple filings against the same issuer continued to decline in 2011. Unique issuers as a percentage of total 2011 filings increased to 86.2 percent from 81.3 percent in 2010, continuing to rebound from a historic low in 2009. From 1997 to 2010, the average ratio of unique issuers to total filings was 89.1 percent. -- Filings against foreign issuers as a percent of total filings sharply increased in 2011. From 2008 to 2010, the average percent of total filings against foreign issuers was 13.4 percent; however, filings against foreign issuers rose to 36.2 percent in 2011. This large increase can be attributed primarily to the number of filings against Chinese firms, which accounted for 41 of the 68 filings against foreign issuers. -- About one out of every 31 companies in the S&P 500 Index at the beginning of 2011 was a defendant in a class action filed during the year compared with an average of about one out of every 16 companies between 2000 and 2010. -- New analysis tracked the probability of a class action advancing through different stages of litigation. Using a sample of 2,415 "Classic Filings" from 1996 to 2011 that have been resolved, we found that for cases from all circuits, 75 percent of filings reached a ruling on motion to dismiss. After the first ruling on motion to dismiss, 32 percent of all cases were dismissed at that point or subsequently, 35 percent settled thereafter but before a ruling on summary judgment, and 8 percent proceeded to a ruling on summary judgment. -- New analysis of the number of federal judges who presided over a specified number of class actions revealed that 329 judges in our database presided over only one case between 1996 and 2011. Only 65 judges presided over more than 10 class actions. Even fewer judges presided over multiple cases that reached a ruling on summary judgment. For judges that presided over cases that reached this stage, 133 presided over only one case. No judge presided over more than three federal class actions that reached a ruling on summary judgment during this period. -- New analysis of the plaintiff law firms most frequently named lead counsel indicated that Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd was named lead or co-lead counsel more often than any other firm from 2009 to 2010. -- In 2011, 60 class actions were filed against firms listed on NYSE or Amex and 105 against firms listed on NASDAQ. However, the market capitalization losses in filings related to issuers listed on NYSE or Amex continued to be larger than filings related to issuers listed on NASDAQ. While NASDAQ filings accounted for 63.6 percent of the total number of filings against issuers listed on major exchanges, these filings only represented 41.4 percent of the total DDL and 24.9 percent of the total MDL in 2011. -- As in 2010, the three circuits with the highest number of filings in 2011 were the Ninth Circuit, Second Circuit, and Third Circuit, with 54, 51, and 14 filings, respectively. The Ninth Circuit surpassed the Second Circuit in 2010 for most filings and maintained that position in 2011, at least partially due to the decline in credit-crisis filings, which tend to be concentrated in the Second Circuit. Professor Grundfest and Dr. Gould are available to speak to the media about the report titled Securities Class Action Filings-- 2011 Year in Review. The full text of the report is available at the Stanford Law School Securities Class Action Clearinghouse (securities.stanford.edu) and Cornerstone Research (http://www.cornerstone.com/securities)Web sites. The Securities Class Action Clearinghouse is an authoritative source of data and analysis on the financial and economic characteristics of federal securities fraud class action litigation. Cornerstone Research -- http://www.cornerstone.com-- provides economic and financial consulting and expert testimony in litigation and regulatory proceedings and cosponsors the Stanford Law School Securities Class Action Clearinghouse. ********* S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Frederick, Maryland USA. Noemi Irene A. Adala, Joy A. Agravante, Ivy B. Magdadaro, Psyche A. Castillon, Julie Anne L. Toledo, Christopher Patalinghug, Frauline Abangan and Peter A. Chapman, Editors. Copyright 2012. All rights reserved. ISSN 1525-2272. This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior written permission of the publishers. Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but is not guaranteed. The CAR subscription rate is $575 for six months delivered via e-mail. Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof are $25 each. For subscription information, contact Peter Chapman at 240/629-3300. * * * End of Transmission * * *