/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/180927.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Thursday, September 27, 2018, Vol. 20, No. 194
Headlines
1236 OCEAN DRIVE: Martinez to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
30-02 ASSOCIATES: Fischler Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
66S FUSION: Teow Files FLSA Suit in E.D. New York
AIRPORT VAN RENTAL: Illegally Withheld Deposit, Sullivan Suit Says
ALLEGIANT TRAVEL CO: Checkman Hits Share Drop from Safety Issue
ALLIED WASTE: Hickey Files Environmental Tort Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
ALPENA WHOLESALE: Faces Karn Suit Alleging WARN Act Violation
AMERICAN ACADEMIC: Nurses Seek OT Wages for Missed Rest/Meal Breaks
ANDALE AIRPORTS: Goldboss Sues Over Illegal Billing Practices
ARIZONA BEVERAGES: Understated Drinks' Sugar Content, Says Neville
BALTIMORE, MA: Students File Class Action Over Sexual Assault
BASF SE: NCP Coating Hits Isocyanate Price-rigging
CAPITAL ONE BANK: Mehr Disputes Interest in Credit Card Bill
CHAMPION WELDING: Pirruccio Action to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
CMRE FINANCIAL: Bleier Files FDCPA Suit in S.D. New York
COMCAST CABLE: Shahlai Conditional Class Cert Partly OK'd
COMMUNITY CARE: Wilson Action Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay
COVENANT TESTING: MacDonald Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
CRONOS GROUP: Faces Lobello Securities Suit in S.D. New York
DASHUB LLC: Ounis Seeks Damages for Overpiced Vehicle Purchase
DEARBORN MOTORS: Reconsideration Bid in Williams Suit Denied
DELEK REFINING: Warehouse Staff Hits Unpaid Overtime, Missed Breaks
DFWGC CONSTRUCTION: Denied Payment of Overtime Wages, Miller Says
DSW INNS LLC: Hotel not Wheelchair Accessible, Neal Suit Says
EAMON GUILFOYLE: Rodriguez Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay
FINANCE SYSTEM: Bazile Disputes Collection Letter
FIRST TRANSIT: Denies Payment for Off-the-Clock Work, Stewart Says
FREMONT CO: Savage Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages
GENERAL MOTORS: Car Owners Sue Over Defective Engine Oil System
GENWORTH LIFE: TVPX ARS Files Suit in E.D. Virginia
GRAY TELEVISION: Curb Appeal Suit Asserts Air-time Price Rigging
GRAY TELEVISION: HVAC Company Hits Air-time Price Rigging
GROUP NINE MEDIA: Sullivan Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
GULF COAST HOSPITALITY: Wheeler Seeks Unpaid Minimum Wages
HEAD NO TAIL: Truck Drivers Seek Unpaid Wages
HELIX ENERGY: Employees File Suit Over Racial Discrimination
HELIX ENERGY: Wilson Action to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
ILLY CAFFE SF: Goldboss Sues Over Illegal Surcharges
INKSTER, MI: Court Narrows Claims in Garner Suit
J&M TOWING INC: Borges Sues Over Illegal Towing Fees
JOHNSON CONTROLS: Court Denies Bid to Certify Hostetler Class
KNORR-BREMSE AG: Agostini Sues Over Anti-poaching Policy
KNORR-BREMSE AG: Brand's Anti-trust Suit Transferred to W.D. Pa.
L'OREAL USA: Court Certifies Classes in Matrix Biolage Suit
LIFEPOINT HEALTH: Wolf Seeks to Halt Merger Deal
LITTLE CAESAR ENTERPRISES: Ogden Sues Over Anti-poaching Policy
LMB MORTGAGE SERVICES: Aparicio Sues Over Illegal SMS Blasts
LOUIS LUTZ INC: Szucs Sues Kin Over Corporate Squabble
LUBRIZOL ADVANCED: Kieu Fies FLSA Suit in C.D. California
LUX COSMETIC: Lacked Time-keeping, Denied Olivera Overtime Pay
LUX COSMETIC: Lacked Time-keeping, Denied Rivera OT Wages
M&A PROJECTS: Nyarko Seeks to Recover Unpaid or Underpaid Wages
MERCHANTS MUTUAL: MSP Recovery Seeks Reimbursement for Payments
MERCK & CO: Pearson Sues Over Zostavax Side Effects
MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY: Faces Jackson Securities Suit in Arizona
NATIONWIDE RECOVERY: Debt Collection Violates FDCPA, McDonald Says
PATENAUDE & FELIX: Voeks Disputes Collection Letter
PEOPLE'S UNITED: Investors Cry Fraud Over Escrow Deal Breach
PIO BOOT CAMP: Rutledge & Davis Sues Over Illegal Faxed Ads
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY: Abrahamov Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY: Kraiem Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York
PRIVATE HEALTHCARE: Rowan Family Sues Over Illegally Faxed Ads
RENTGROW INC: McIntyre Files Suit Over Erroneous Report
RFI ENTERPRISES: Peters Labor Suit Remanded to State Court
ROCKWELL MEDICAL: Spock Files Suit Over Share Price Drop
SANCHEZ OIL: Munoz Suit Seeks to Recover OT Pay Under FLSA
SANDBOX TRANSPORTATION: Dotson Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages
SARA BRONFMAN-IGTET: Sued Over Fake Academic Program
SILVERSTEIN PROPERTIES: Face Sullivan ADA Suit in S.D.N.Y.
SIOUX CITY POLICE: Hunter Files Civil Rights Action in South Dakota
SKECHERS USA: Workers' Fund Sues Over Share Price Drop
SLEEP MANAGEMENT: Fails to Pay OT Under FLSA & AMWA, Prince Says
SOUTH FLORIDA CONTROLS: Serra Action to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
STARWOOD HOTELS: Santana Seeks Damages for Unpaid Wages
SUPER INSURANCE: Illegally Sends Telemarketing Texts, Perez Says
TECHNOLOGY INSURANCE: MSP Recovery Seeks Reimbursement for Payments
TIGER EYE PIZZA: Wright Says Vehicle Reimbursements Not Enough
TITAN INDUSTRIES: Schlag Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay
TRAN VUONG CORP: Does Not Pay Overtime Wages, He Suit Says
TRANSUNION LLC: McIntyre Sues Over Erroneous Credit Report
TRIBUNE MEDIA CO: Masseys Jewelers Hits Air-time Price Rigging
TRIBUNE MEDIA: Arbitrage Fund Hits Share Price Drop
TWENTY-THREE-ONE-NOUGHT-W: Recarte Files FLSA Suit in S.D. New York
UBER TECH: Diva Limousine Sues Over Anti-competitive Practices
UNI NYC: Lopez Files FLSA Suit in S.D. New York
VACATION EXPERTS: Illegally Sends Phone Messages, Lee Suit Says
VICTORIA CONSULTING: Siguencia Files FLSA Suit in E.D. New York
VISIONPRO CONNECTIONS: Prelim. Conf. in Fearon Suit Set for Oct. 22
WORLD-WIDE HOLDINGS: Fischler Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
YUQI'S CUISINE INC: Restaurant Staff Seeks Unpaid OT Wages
*********
1236 OCEAN DRIVE: Martinez to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dora Martinez, and other similarly situated individuals, Plaintiff,
v. 1236 Ocean Drive LLC, Il Giardino, LLC, and Iman Duz,
Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-23651, (S.D. Fla., September 6, 2018)
seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation, as well as an
additional amount as liquidated damages, costs and reasonable
attorneys' fees under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Defendants operate as "Hotel Ocean" in Miami Dade where Martinez
worked as a cook. She claims that the Defendants did not properly
compensate her for hours she worked in excess of 40 per week. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
R. Martin Saenz, Esq.
SAENZ & ANDERSON, PLLC
20900 NE 30th Avenue, Ste. 800
Aventura, FL 33180
Telephone: (305) 503-5131
Facsimile: (888) 270-5549
Email: msaenz@saenzanderson.com
30-02 ASSOCIATES: Fischler Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against 30-02 Associates LLC
et al. The case is styled as Brian Fischler individually and on
behalf of all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 30-02
Associates LLC, Lightstone Real Estate Income Trust Inc.,
Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-05318 (E.D. N.Y., Sept. 20, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act of 1990.
30-02 Associates LLC is a privately held company in Long Island
City, NY and is a Single Location business.
Lightstone Real Estate Income Trust Inc. focuses on originating,
acquiring, and managing a portfolio of real estate-related
investments in the United States. It intends to invest in mezzanine
loans, first lien mortgage loans, second lien mortgage loans,
bridge loans, and preferred equity interests, as well as in debt
and derivative securities related to real estate assets. Lightstone
Real Estate Income Trust Inc. was founded in 2014 and is based in
Lakewood, New Jersey.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglas Brian Lipsky, Esq.
Lipsky Lowe LLP
630 Third Avenue
Fifth Floor
New York, NY 10017
Phone: (212) 392-4772
Fax: (212) 444-1030
Email: doug@lipskylowe.com
66S FUSION: Teow Files FLSA Suit in E.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against 66S Fusion Inc. et
al. The case is styled as Yoke Wah Teow, Chi Ming Yau individually
and on behalf of all other employees similarly situated, Plaintiff
v. 66S Fusion Inc. d/b/a Asian Fusion USA, James Yao, Simon "Doe",
"John" Xu, Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-05268 (E.D. N.Y., Sept. 19,
2018).
The Plaintiffs file the case under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
66S Fusion is a restaurant serving authentic Asian cuisine. 66S is
located at 130 Flushing Ave, Brooklyn, NY 11205 b/t Waverly Ave &
Clinton Ave.[BN]
The Plaintiffs appear pro se.
AIRPORT VAN RENTAL: Illegally Withheld Deposit, Sullivan Suit Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
Joshua Sullivan, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Airport Van Rental, Inc. and Does 1-10,
Defendants, Case No. 2018L009768, (Ill. Cir., September 10, 2018),
seeks redress for Defendant's breach of rental car agreements by
retaining deposits it had no valid basis to keep.
On or about February 23, 2018, Sullivan reserved a mini-van rental
with Airport Van Rental through Orbitz, LLC, an online travel fare
aggregator. Plaintiff arranged to pick up the mini-van from
Defendant's Midway location for $358.63, plus a $200.00 deposit.
Airport Van Rental refused to return Plaintiff's deposit saying it
was for cleaning fees. However, Sullivan claims that the van was
in a dirty state when it was handed to him. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David B. Levin, Esq.
Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C.
111 West Jackson Blvd., Suite 1700
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: (312) 212-4355
Fax: (866) 633-0228
Email: dlevin@toddflaw.com
ALLEGIANT TRAVEL CO: Checkman Hits Share Drop from Safety Issue
---------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Checkman, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Allegiant Travel Company, Maurice J.
Gallagher, Jr., and Scott Sheldon, Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-01758
(C.D. Cal., September 10, 2018), seeks to recover compensable
damages caused by violations of the federal securities laws and to
pursue remedies under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.
Allegiant provides travel services and products to residents of
under-served cities in the United States, offering scheduled air
transportation on limited frequency nonstop flights between
under-served cities and leisure destinations.
An Allegiant plane was forced to make an emergency landing in
Florida after smoke was detected in the cabin shortly after
takeoff. Defendants failed to disclose that Allegiant lacked
adequate systems to ensure its aircraft were being properly
maintained; Allegiant was not operating responsibly and ethically
and providing safe working conditions for its employees. On this
news, shares of Allegiant fell $14.20 per share or over 8.59% to
close at $151.05 per share on April 13, 2018. Checkman purchased
Allegiant common stock and lost substantially. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Laurence M. Rosen, Esq.
THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2450
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 785-2610
Facsimile: (213) 226-4684
Email: lrosen@rosenlegal.com
ALLIED WASTE: Hickey Files Environmental Tort Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Allied Waste Niagara
Falls Landfill, LLC. The case is styled as Emily Hickey on behalf
of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Allied
Waste Niagara Falls Landfill, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 165227/2018
(N.Y. Sup. Ct., Niagara Cty., Sept. 20, 2018).
The case type is stated as "Environmental Tort".
Allied Waste Niagara Falls Landfill, LLC operates as a subsidiary
of Republic Services, Inc. and is located at 18500 North Allied
Way, Phoenix, AZ 85054, United States. Republic Services offers
residential, municipal, commercial and industrial garbage
pickup.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
MICHAELS & SMOLAK, P.C.
17 East Genesee St - Suite 401
Auburn, NY 13021
Phone: (315) 253-3293
The Defendant is represented by:
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
54 State St., Sixth Floor
Albany, NY 12207
Phone: (518) 689-1400
ALPENA WHOLESALE: Faces Karn Suit Alleging WARN Act Violation
--------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID KARN and NATHAN HENDRICK, Individually and on Behalf of All
Others Similarly Situated v. ALPENA WHOLESALE GROCER COMPANY d/b/a
GREAT NORTH FOODS, DOUVILLE-JOHNSTON CORPORATION, ALPENA OIL
COMPANY, INC., and HURON DISTRIBUTORS, INC., Case No.
1:18-cv-12874-TLL-PTM (E.D. Mich., September 14, 2018), arises from
the Defendants' alleged failure to provide to terminated employees
60 days' written notice of a plant closure, in violation of the
Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act.
The lawsuit is brought on behalf of all former employees of the
Defendants, who were terminated without cause beginning on or about
August 9, 2018, from the Douville-Johnston Defendants' business
located in Alpena, Michigan (the "Plant Closing").
Alpena Wholesale Grocer Company, doing business as Great North
Foods, is incorporated under the laws of the state of Michigan and
based in Alpena, Michigan. Great North Foods is a wholesale
grocery company that has been operating out of Alpena for more than
85 years, distributing and selling food and grocery products to
convenience stores and grocery stores throughout Michigan,
Wisconsin, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio.
Douville-Johnston Corporation is a parent corporation for Alpena
Wholesale. Douville-Johnston is organized in Michigan, and based
in Alpena, Michigan. Alpena Oil Company, Inc., is a subsidiary of
Douville-Johnston. Alpena Oil is in Michigan and based in Alpena.
Huron Distributors, Inc., is a subsidiary corporation for
Douville-Johnston. Huron Distributors is organized in Michigan,
and based in Alpena.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Michael P. Misch, Esq.
ANDERSON, AGOSTINO & KELLER, P.C.
131 South Taylor Street
South Bend, IN 46601
Telephone: (574) 288-1510
Facsimile: (574) 288-1650
E-mail: misch@aaklaw.com
AMERICAN ACADEMIC: Nurses Seek OT Wages for Missed Rest/Meal Breaks
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Joelle Leone and Michael Winn, for themselves and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. American Academic Health System,
LLC, Tenet Healthcare Corp. and Hahnemann University Hospital,
Defendants, Case No. No. 18-cv-03769, (E.D. Pa., September 5, 2018)
seeks to recover overtime wages for violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938 and the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act of
1968.
Plaintiffs worked as full-time registered nurses in the Hahnemann
University Hospital Emergency Room from July 2010 to April 7, 2018.
They claim to have logged 40 or more hours in ten or more workweeks
from working through their rest/meal breaks.
American Academic Health System owns Hahnemann University Hospital
in Philadelphia. [BN]
Plaintiffs are represented by:
David J. Cohen, Esq.
STEPHAN ZOURAS, LLP
604 Spruce Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Tel: (215) 873-4836
Email: dcohen@stephanzouras.com
- and -
James B. Zouras, Esq.
Ryan F. Stephan, Esq.
STEPHAN ZOURAS, LLP
205 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 2560
Chicago, IL 60601
Tel: (312) 233-1550
Website: www.stephanzouras.com
ANDALE AIRPORTS: Goldboss Sues Over Illegal Billing Practices
-------------------------------------------------------------
Lauren Goldboss, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Andale Airports and Does 1 to 25,
inclusive, Defendant, Case No. 18-569408 (Cal. Super. Ct.,
September 4, 2018), seeks redress for breach of contract, breach of
duty of good faith and fair dealing, negligent misrepresentation,
intentional misrepresentation, conversion, concealment and
violation of the California Business and Profession Code resulting
from undisclosed, unauthorized and unlawful billing practices.
Andale is a family-owned Mexican restaurant with a main location at
21 No. 3 II Santa Cruz Ave., Los Gatos CA 95030, and locations
within the SFO and OAK airport.
According to the complaint, instead of raising their menu prices,
the Defendant illegally adds a 2% "health surcharge" onto a
customer's bill. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua Bordin-Wosk, Esq.
Shannon Guevara, Esq.
Talissa Mulholland, Esq.
BB LAW GROUP LLP
6100 Center Drive, Suite 1100
Howard Hughes Center
Los Angeles, CA 90045
Telephone: (323) 925-7800
Facsimile: (323) 925-7801
Email: JBordinWosk@BBLawGroupLLP.com
SGuevara@BBLawGroupLLP.com
TMulholland@BBLawGroupLLP.com
ARIZONA BEVERAGES: Understated Drinks' Sugar Content, Says Neville
------------------------------------------------------------------
Lindsey Neville, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Arizona Beverages USA LLC and Beverage
Marketing USA, Inc., Case No. 18-cv-05040, (E.D. N.Y., September 6,
2018) seeks monetary damages, compensatory, incidental, or
consequential damages, any and all equitable monetary relief,
reasonable costs and expenses of suit, including attorneys' fees,
prejudgment and post-judgment interest and such further relief for
violation of various state consumer protection statutes.
Defendants market and sell "AriZona" branded beverages. Neville
claims that their labels understate the actual amount of sugar
contained in their drinks, specifically, the amount of sugar per
serving in the 16 ounce bottles is twice the amount stated by the
Defendants in their packaging. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael R. Reese, Esq.
George V. Granade, Esq.
100 West 93rd Street, 16th Floor
New York, NY 10025
Telephone: (212) 643-0500
Facsimile: (212) 253-4272
Email: mreese@reesellp.com
ggranade@reesellp.com
BALTIMORE, MA: Students File Class Action Over Sexual Assault
---------------------------------------------------------------
Anna Borkowski and Katelyn Frank and others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, V. Baltimore County, Maryland, Baltimore County Police
Department, The Board of Regents for the University System of
Maryland, University of Maryland Baltimore County, Lisa Dever,
Scott Shellenberger, Bonnie Fox, Krystin Richardson, Nicholas
Tomas, Kristen Burrows, Kriseten Montgomery, Paul Dillon,
Bernadette Hunton, Paul Dorfler, Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-02809,
(D. Md., September 10, 2018) seeks redress for violation of Title
IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.
Plaintiffs are students of the University of Maryland who where
sexually assaulted while on campus. They claim that the Defendants
tolerated such acts of violence that occurred within the school
campus.
Scott Shellenberger is the State's Attorney for Baltimore County.
Lisa Dever is and Assistant State's Attorney and the Chief of the
Sex Offense and Child Abuse Division of the Baltimore County
State's Attorney's Office where Bonnie Fox worked as an
investigator. Richardson is an Assistant State's Attorney, and head
of the Baltimore County State's Attorney's Office's Family
division. Nicholas Tomas, Kristen Burrows, Kriseten Montgomery,
Paul Dillon, Bernadette Hunton and Paul Dorfler are detectives at
the Baltimore County Police Department. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rignal W. Baldwin V, Esq.
Stephen C. Rigg, Esq.
BALDWINLAW, LLC
111 South Calvert Street, Suite 1805
Baltimore, MD 21202
Telephone: (410) 385-5695
Facsimile: (443) 703-7772
Email: RBaldwinSr@baldwinlawllc.com
SRigg@baldwinlawllc.com
BASF SE: NCP Coating Hits Isocyanate Price-rigging
--------------------------------------------------
NCP Coatings, Inc., individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, vs. BASF SE, BASF Corp., Bayer AG,
Bayer Corp., Covestro AG, Covestro LLC, Dowdupont Inc., Dow
Chemical Co., Huntsman Corp., Huntsman International LLC, MCNS
Polyurethanes USA Inc., Mitsui Chemicals, Inc., Mitsui Chemicals
America, Inc., Mitsui Chemicals & SKC Polyurethanes, Inc., Wanhua
Chemical Group Co., Ltd., Wanhua Chemical (America) Co. Ltd. and
Wanhua Chemical US Holding, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-13617,
(D. N.J., September 6, 2018), alleges violations of federal
antitrust laws by the Defendants in their practice of reducing the
global supply of isocyanates by reducing their output through
coordinated plant shutdowns and suspensions, thereby allowing
lockstep price increases from on or before January 2016 through the
present.
Covestro, Dow, BASF, Huntsman, Wanhua and Mitsui manufacture
methylene diphenyl diisocyanate and toluene diisocyanate, chemicals
used in making polyurethane.
NCP Coatings, Inc. is a Michigan corporation which purchased
Isocyanates directly from one or more of the defendants. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard M. Paul III, Esq.
PAUL LLP
601 Walnut Street, Suite 300
Kansas City, MO 64106
Phone: (816) 984-8100
Fax: (816) 984-8101
Email: Rick@PaulLLP.com
- and -
Jeremiah Frei-Pearson, Esq.
Antonino B. Roman, Esq.
Andrew G. Finkelstein, Esq.
FINKELSTEIN, BLANKINSHIP, FREI-PEARSON & GARBER, LLP
445 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 605
White Plains, NY 10601
Telephone: (914) 298-3281
Facsimile: (914) 824-1561
Email: jfrei-pearson@fbfglaw.com
aroman@fbfglaw.com
afinkelstein@lawampm.com
CAPITAL ONE BANK: Mehr Disputes Interest in Credit Card Bill
------------------------------------------------------------
Shabnam Mehr, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Capital One Bank (USA) N.A., Defendant,
Case No. 18-cv-01576 (C.D. Cal., September 4, 2018), seeks damages
including but not limited to, lost wages, and for inconvenience and
emotional distress, under California's Unfair Competition Law and
Business and Professions Code.
Plaintiff incurred financial obligations to Defendant by opening a
personal credit card account. Plaintiff disputes the interest that
had accrued on his November 2017 bill since he paid his balance in
full prior to its due date, notes the complaint. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Abbas Kazerounian, Esq.
Matthew M. Loker, Esq.
Elizabeth A. Wagner, Esq.
KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC
245 Fischer Avenue, Unit D1
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Telephone: (800) 400-6808
Facsimile: (800) 520-5523
Email: ak@kazlg.com
ml@kazlg.com
elizabeth@kazlg.com
- and -
Joshua Swigart, Esq.
HYDE AND SWIGART
2221 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 101
San Diego, CA 92108
Telephone: (619) 233-7770
Facsimile: (619) 297-1022 to 26
Email: Josh@westcoastlitigation.com
- and -
Wayne R. Gross, Esq.
Evan C. Borges, Esq.
Lee K. Fink, Esq.
GREENBERG GROSS LLP
650 Town Center Drive, Suite 1700
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Telephone: (949) 383-2800
Facsimile: (949) 383-2801
Email: WGross@GGTrialLaw.com
EBorges@GGTrialLaw.com
LFink@GGTrialLaw.com
CHAMPION WELDING: Pirruccio Action to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------
Antonio Enrique Pirruccio, and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, v. Champion Welding Services, LLC and Victor David
Tuckler, Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-23650 (S.D. Fla., September 6,
2018), requests compensatory and liquidated damages and reasonable
attorney's fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act,
for unpaid overtime, liquidated damages, prejudgment interest and
any and all other relief.
Plaintiff routinely worked overtime but was not paid for hours
worked in excess of forty hours per week, says the complaint. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J.H. Zidell, Esq.
J.H. ZIDELL, P.A.
300 71st Street, Suite 605
Miami Beach, FL 33141
Tel: (305) 865-6766
Fax: (305) 865-7167
Email: zabogado@aol.com
CMRE FINANCIAL: Bleier Files FDCPA Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against CMRE Financial
Services, Inc. The case is styled as Sarah Bleier individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CMRE
Financial Services, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 7:18-cv-08618 (S.D.
N.Y., Sept. 20, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act.
CMRE Financial Services, Inc. provides accounts receivables
management services to healthcare organizations. It offers
collection; self-pay accounts receivables management; insurance and
worker's compensation follow-up and rebilling; electronic funds
transfer; and managed care services. The company is based in Brea,
California.[BN]
The Plaintiff appears pro se.
COMCAST CABLE: Shahlai Conditional Class Cert Partly OK'd
---------------------------------------------------------
In the case, RAMIN SHAHLAI, on his own behalf and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. COMCAST CABLE
COMMUNICATIONS MANAGEMENT, LLC, Defendant, Civil Action No.
16-cv-2556-WJM-NRN (D. Colo.), Judge William J. Martinez of the
U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado granted in part
and denied in part the parties' Joint Motion for Conditional
Certification of Class and Preliminary Approval of Settlement
Agreement.
Shahlai brings the action against the Defendant for violations of
the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), and the Colorado Minimum
Wage Act. The Plaintiff claims that the Defendant failed to
properly reimburse employees for expenses and improperly deducted
sums from employee paychecks for employer-provided tools, and that
these actions resulted in the Defendant paying employees less than
the federal and Colorado minimum wage and applicable overtime
rates.
The Plaintiff and other members of the proposed class were cable
technician employees of the now-defunct Icon Cable, Inc. As cable
technicians, he and others were responsible for installing
Comcast's cable and internet service devices in Comcast's clients'
homes. The Plaintiff claims that Icon Cable was a contractor for
Comcast and that Comcast is liable for Icon Cable's wage and hour
violations as a "joint employer" under the FLSA and Minimum Wage
Act. Comcast disputes that it was or is an employer or joint
employer of any Icon Cable cable technician.
Currently before the Court is the parties' Joint Motion. They seek
conditional certification of an FLSA collection action,
certification of a Rule 23 class action, and preliminary approval
of the executed Final Settlement Agreement and Final Release
resolving the FLSA and state law claims.
The parties propose the following notice and settlement procedure:
after certification of a conditional FLSA collective action and
Rule 23 class action, a settlement administrator will send a class
notice to each class member. Under the procedure proposed by the
parties, the notice will contain the basic terms of the settlement
agreement, an estimated sum of damages of the class member, and the
procedure by which a class member may object to or opt out of the
class action within 60 days of mailing of the notice. They
submitted a proposed notice that references both the state and
federal claims. That notice contains information related to opting
out of the class or objecting to the settlement. It does not
describe the opt-in procedure for FLSA claims or provide a consent
to join form for the FLSA claims, but does note that FLSA claims
will be released if the class member signs and cashes the check.
After the close of the opt-out period, the parties propose to move
for final approval of the settlement agreement. After final
approval of the settlement agreement, the settlement administrator
will then send checks to class members who do not opt out according
to an agreed-upon methodology which combines settlement payments
for the FLSA and Minimum Wage Act claims..
By cashing the settlement check, a Qualified Class Member waives
his or her federal FLSA claims against Comcast. If a Qualified
Class Member does not cash the settlement check by a certain date,
he or she becomes an "Affected Class Member," who releases all
Minimum Wage Act claims but not FLSA claims. Essentially, by
signing the settlement check, a Qualified Class Member opts into
the FLSA action.
The parties have stipulated to the following class definitions:
(1) As to the Minimum Wage Act class action claims, a class
defined as all Icon Cable employees who worked as cable
installation technicians between Oct. 13, 2014 and April 26, 2016.
(2) As to the FLSA collective action claims, a group defined
as all Icon Cable employees who worked as cable installation
technicians between Oct. 13, 2013 and April 26, 2016.
They explain in a footnote that these proposed classes exclude
individuals who did not finish the two- to four-week training
program because those individuals earned above minimum wage and did
not incur vehicle expenses.
Judge Martinez finds that the Plaintiffs have meet the Rule 23(a)
prerequisites. Having reviewed the record and being fully advised,
he agrees with the parties' conclusion that class certification is
appropriate under Rule 23(b)(3). For essentially the same reasons
explained, as to Rule 23, and given the parties' stipulation and
joint motion, he also finds that preliminary certification of the
proposed FLSA class is warranted under the comparatively lenient
standard for preliminary certification and notice of an FLSA
collective action.
Finally, the Judge finds that the parties' proposed notice and FLSA
procedure does not give the FLSA opt-in Plaintiffs the ability to
intentionally join and meaningfully participate in the litigation.
Because the notice and proposed settlement will have to be altered
to incorporate changes FLSA opt-in procedures (which may in turn
impact distribution of the settlement to the FLSA Plaintiffs), the
Judge will deny without prejudice the parties' Joint Motion as to
proposed notice and the settlement agreement.
For these reasons, Judge Martinez granted in part and denied in
part the parties' Joint Motion to for Conditional Certification of
Class and Preliminary Approval of Settlement Agreement. He
conditioonally certified as a collective action under 29 U.S.C.
Section 216(b), with the collective action members eligible to
opt-in to the Plaintiff's First Claim for Relief defined as all
Icon Cable employees who completed the training program and worked
as cable installation technicians between Oct. 13, 2013 and April
26, 2016.
The Judge certified a Class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) & 23(b)(3)
the following class as to the Plaintiff's Second Claim for Relief"
all Icon Cable employees who completed the training program and
worked as cable installation technicians between Oct. 13, 2014 and
April 26, 2016.
He approved Diaz as the class representative; and Brandt Milstein,
Milstein Law Office, 1123 Spruce Street, Suite 200, Boulder, CO
80302. as the class counsel.
No later than Aug. 31, 2018 the parties will submit a proposed
opt-in FLSA Notice and Consent to Join for the Court's review and
approval. In the Order the Court issues approving the FLSA opt-in
notice, it will set the deadline for the parties to complete the
mailing of these documents, as well as the closing date for the
FLSA opt-in period. These deadlines will be included in the FLSA
Notice. The parties will then effect notice to potential FLSA
collective action members by mailing to all such persons, via
first-class U.S. Mail, the final FLSA Notice and Consent to Join
form, incorporating any Court modifications.
The parties will file a Notice of Completion of Mailing within
seven days of completing the mailing. After the opt-in period
expires and the opt-in Plaintiffs are known, assuming the parties
still wish to settle, the parties will filed a copy of a revised
settlement agreement together with a motion for its preliminary
approval and proposed Rule 23 class notice form. If the parties no
longer intend to settle, the parties will instead file a status
report within 10 days after the FLSA opt-in period has expired.
Upon receipt of a Motion for Preliminary Approval of a Revised
Settlement Agreement, the Court will determine whether to approve
the proposed settlement and, as needed, approve notice of the Rule
23 class certification and settlement, and set a final fairness
hearing and related deadlines for filing objections and a request
for final approval.
Jugde Martinez denied without prejudice all other relief requested
in the Joint Motion.
A full-text copy of the Court's Aug. 15, 2018 Order is available at
https://is.gd/rXkQwr from Leagle.com.
Ramin Shahlai, on his own behalf and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, represented by Andrew H. Turner,
Kelman Buescher Firm, Ashley Kathryn Boothby, Kelman Buescher Firm
& Brandt Powers Milstein -- Brandt@MilsteinLawOffice.com --
Milstein Law Office.
Comcast Cable Communicati ons Management, LLC, Defendant,
represented by J. Matt Thornton -- THORNTONJBALLARDSPAHR.COM --
Ballard Spahr, LLP, Kelly Theresa Kindig -- KINDIGKBALLARDSPAHR.COM
-- Ballard Spahr, LLP, Stephen Joel Kastenberg --
KASTENBERGBALLARDSPAHR.COM -- Ballard Spahr, LLP & Steven W. Suflas
-- SUFLASBALLARDSPAHR.COM -- Ballard Spahr, LLP.
COMMUNITY CARE: Wilson Action Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay
-----------------------------------------------------------
Monetta Wilson and Patronella Holmes, on behalf of themselves and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v.
Community Care Services, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 18-cv-01186,
(W.D. La., September 10, 2018), seeks unpaid overtime pay,
liquidated damages, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs under the
Fair Labor Standards Act.
Community Care Services provides home care services to elderly
and/or invalid clients where Wilson and Holmes worked as domestic
service workers, rendering more than forty hours per workweek
without overtime pay, says the complaint. [BN]
Plaintiffs are represented by:
Robert R. Debes, Jr., Esq.
SHELLIST LAZARZ SLOBIN LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1515
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 621-2277
Facsimile: (713) 621-0993
Email: bdebes@eeoc.net
- and -
Edward B. Cloutman, III, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF ED CLOUTMAN
3301 Elm Street
Dallas, TX 75226-1637
Telephone: (214) 939-9222
Facsimile: (214) 939-9229
Email: ecloutman@lawoffices.email
COVENANT TESTING: MacDonald Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------------
Jordon MacDonald, on behalf of himself and all similarly situated
persons, Plaintiff, v. Covenant Testing Technologies, LLC,
Defendants, Case No. No. 18-cv-02290, (D. Colo., September 6, 2018)
seeks to recover overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938, the Colorado Wage Claim Act and the Colorado
Minimum Wage Act.
Covenant is an oilfield service company providing flowback and
well-testing services in Colorado and Texas. MacDonald worked for
Covenant providing testing services at various locations primarily
in Weld County, Colorado.
According to the complaint, the Plaintiff was required to work more
than 12 hours per day and/or 40 hours per workweek but was not
compensated at the mandated time and one-half rate for all of his
overtime hours and failed to include his "per diem" in the
computation of his overtime rate. In addition, Covenant failed to
pay Plaintiff for all off the clock work. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Brian D. Gonzales, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF BRIAN D. GONZALES, PLLC
2580 East Harmony Road, Suite 201
Fort Collins, CO 80528
Telephone: (970) 214-0562
Email: BGonzales@ColoradoWageLaw.com
CRONOS GROUP: Faces Lobello Securities Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------------
IDA LOBELLO, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated v. CRONOS GROUP INC., and MICHAEL GORENSTEIN, Case No.
1:18-cv-08406 (S.D.N.Y., September 14, 2018), alleges that
throughout the class period and in violation of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, the Defendants made materially false and
misleading statements regarding the Company's business, operational
and compliance policies.
Specifically, the Defendants made false and/or misleading
statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the size of Cronos's
distribution agreements with several Canadian provinces announced
on August 21, 2018, was relatively small; and (ii) as a result,
Cronos's public statements were materially false and misleading at
all relevant times.
Cronos, Inc., is incorporated under the laws of Ontario, Canada
with its principal executive offices located in Toronto, Canada.
Michael Gorenstein has served, at all relevant times, as the Chief
Executive Officer, President, and Chairman of the Company's Board
of Directors. Cronos is a cannabis company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq.
J. Alexander Hood II, Esq.
POMERANTZ LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (212) 661-1100
Facsimile: (212) 661-8665
E-mail: jalieberman@pomlaw.com
ahood@pomlaw.com
- and -
Patrick V. Dahlstrom, Esq.
POMERANTZ LLP
10 South La Salle Street, Suite 3505
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: (312) 377-1181
Facsimile: (312) 377-1184
E-mail: pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com
- and -
Peretz Bronstein, Esq.
BRONSTEIN, GEWIRTZ & GROSSMAN, LLC
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4600
New York, NY 10165
Telephone: (212) 697-6484
E-mail: peretz@bgandg.com
DASHUB LLC: Ounis Seeks Damages for Overpiced Vehicle Purchase
---------------------------------------------------------------
Yacine Ounis, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Dashub, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
18-cv-05064 (E.D. N.Y., September 6, 2018), seeks actual, treble,
statutory and punitive damages, rescission, attorney fees and costs
and such other, different and further relief for violation of New
York Vehicle and Traffic Law and New York State General Business
Law.
The Defendant is a licensed automobile dealer that sells vehicles
purchased at auction to consumers nationwide. It bids on and buys
used vehicles at auctions and then sells the vehicle to the
consumer for a fee. Dashub allegedly falsified the winning bid
prices on the vehicles it purchases, represents to its customers
that it paid a higher price at auctions than it actually paid and
then charges its customers that inflated price and pockets the
difference.
On April 17, 2018, using Dashub's website, Plaintiff paid a
required $1,300.00 deposit and entered a bid amount of $10,830.00
for a 2012 BMW 3 Series. Ounis received an email informing him of
being the highest bidder for $10,600.00. In reality, however, the
actual winning bid amount for the said vehicle was $10,100.00 plus
an auction fee of $658.00, transaction fee of $499.00,
documentation fee of $85.00 and a shipping fee of $275.00. To add
to that, the vehicle did not have a warranty. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel A. Schlanger, Esq.
Evan S. Rothfarb, Esq.
SCHLANGER LAW GROUP LLP
9 East 40th Street, Suite 1300
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (212) 500-6114
Facsimile: (646) 612-7996
Email: dschlanger@consumerprotection.net
- and -
Brian K. Herrington, Esq.
SCHLANGER LAW GROUP LLP
602 Steed Road, Suite 100
Ridgeland, MS 39157
Telephone: (601) 208-0013
Facsimile: (646) 612-7996
Email: bherrington@consumerprotection.net
DEARBORN MOTORS: Reconsideration Bid in Williams Suit Denied
------------------------------------------------------------
In the case, BRIAN P. WILLIAMS and JAY HOWARD, Plaintiffs, v.
DEARBORN MOTORS 1, LLC, d/b/a ALL PRO NISSAN OF DEARBORN,
Defendant, Case No. 17-12724 (E.D. Mich.), Judge Nancy G. Edmunds
of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan,
Southern Division, denied the Plaintiffs' motion for
reconsideration filed on June 7, 2018.
On May 24, 2018, the Court entered an Order Granting Defendant's
Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Class Claims and to Compel
Arbitration of Plaintiff Howard's Individual Claims. The matter is
now before the Court on the Plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration.
The Defendant filed a response on June 20, 2018. The Court heard
oral argument on Aug. 8, 2018.
At the outset, Judge Edmunds agrees with the Defendant that the
Plaintiffs base their motion for reconsideration in large part on
new legal arguments that were available at the time they responded
to the Defendant's motion to dismiss the Plaintiffs' class claims
and to compel arbitration of Howard's individual claims. She says
a motion for reconsideration is not a vehicle to proffer new
arguments that the movant could have brought up earlier.
Additionally, the Plaintiffs have not demonstrated a palpable
defect by which the Court or the parties have been mislead. That
said, there have been recent developments in this area of the law,
and the Court did not hear oral argument from the parties before
issuing its May 24, 2018 Order. Accordingly, the Court requested
further briefing and heard oral argument on the Plaintiffs' motion
for reconsideration, and the Judge addresses the Plaintiffs' new
arguments.
After heavily relying on Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Alternative
Entm't, Inc., in response to the Defendant's motion to dismiss and
to compel arbitration, the Plaintiffs now maintain that the Supreme
Court's recent decision in Epic Sys. Corp. v. Lewis, which
abrogates Alternative Entertainment, does not pertain to their
pattern-or-practice claims under Title VII, the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"), and the Age Discrimination in Employment
Act ("ADEA"). The Plaintiffs now argue that Epic Systems is
limited to wage and overtime claims under the Fair Labor Standards
Act ("FLSA").
As the Court stressed in its May 24, 2018 Order, the Judge finds
that the Plaintiffs challenge the arbitration agreement precisely
because it requires individual arbitration, yet Supreme Court
precedent teaches that such an argument impermissibly disfavors
arbitration. The Supreme Court has stressed that an overarching
purpose of the FAA is to ensure the enforcement of arbitration
agreements according to their terms so as to facilitate streamlined
proceedings. Requiring the availability of classwide arbitration
interferes with fundamental attributes of arbitration. By
attacking only the individualized nature of the arbitration
proceedings they agreed to, the Plaintiffs seek to interfere with
one of arbitration's fundamental attributes.
The Plaintiffs now argue that the Court cannot compel individual
arbitration of their pattern-or-practice class claims under Title
VII, ADA, and ADEA because that would limit their rights under the
Acts. Defendant responds that Plaintiffs erroneously identify this
case as a pattern-or-practice class action. Defendant further
argues that "pattern-or-practice" refers to a method of proving
discrimination which affords no substantive right, and not to a
freestanding cause of action.
The Judge finds that their argument must fail because
"pattern-or-practice" refers to a judicially-crafted method of
proof and not a freestanding cause of action. Simply put, the
Plaintiffs have no substantive statutory right to bring a
"pattern-or-practice" class claim.
The Plaintiffs next invoke a judge-made exception to the FAA,
arguing that the arbitration agreement prevents the effective
vindication of their statutory rights under Title VII, the ADA, and
the ADEA. The Judge holds that this argument must fail. She says
the arbitration agreement specifically states that the arbitrator
will permit reasonable discovery and will be permitted to award any
relief that would be available in a court. Although the
arbitration agreement includes a class-action waiver, it does not
eliminate the Plaintiffs' right to pursue their statutory remedies;
it merely limits arbitration to the two contracting parties.
Finally, the fact remains that the Plaintiffs have failed to
explain how they have standing to argue that the opt-out provision
in the arbitration agreement impedes the EEOC's enforcement powers.
The Judge concludes that, even assuming that the arbitration
agreement violates Title VII's, the ADA's, and the ADEA's
procedural requirements, the Plaintiffs have not shown that the
violation resulted in concrete harm or entails a degree of risk
sufficient to meet the concreteness requirement.
For these reasons, Judge Edmunds denied the Plaintiffs' motion for
reconsideration.
A full-text copy of the Court's Aug. 15, 2018 Order is available at
https://is.gd/WpxXFx from Leagle.com.
BRIAN P WILLIAMS & Jay Howard, Plaintiffs, represented by Adam
Shereef Abu-Akeel, Akeel & Valentine, PLC & Shereef H. Akeel, Akeel
& Valentine.
DEARBORN MOTORS 1, LLC, Defendant, represented by Susan D. Koval --
skoval@nemethlawpc.com -- Nemeth Law, P.C.
DELEK REFINING: Warehouse Staff Hits Unpaid Overtime, Missed Breaks
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Mitchell Modisett, Jeff Willoughby, Glen Ford, Jeff Gaddis, William
Mcdonald and Fred Marshall, on behalf of themselves and All Others
Similarly Situated v. Delek Refining, Ltd., Case No. No.
18-cv-00389, (E.D. Tex., September 7, 2018) seeks recovery of
unpaid wages and overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards
Act.
Delek operates refineries located in Tyler, Texas, Big Spring,
Texas, El Dorado, Arkansas and Krotz Springs, Louisiana where
Plaintiffs worked as maintenance and warehouse workers. They claim
overtime wages for all time worked in excess of 40 hours per
workweek. They further allege that Defendant miscalculated their
overtime wages by failing to include shift differential pay in the
regular rate from which their overtime wages were calculated. Delek
allegedly rounded-down employees' working hours to the lower
quarter hour and automatically deducted a thirty minute meal break
yet required employees to work "off-the-clock" for as much as 30-45
minutes per shift. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
William S. Hommel, Jr.
HOMMEL LAW FIRM
1404 Rice, Road, Suite 200
Tyler, TX 75703
Tel: (903) 596-7100
Fax: (469) 533-1618
Email: bhommel@hommelfirm.com
DFWGC CONSTRUCTION: Denied Payment of Overtime Wages, Miller Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
Antonio Miller, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DFWGC Construction, LLC, Alterra
International Holdings, LLC, Mert Gokturk and Mukemmel Sarimsakci,
individually, Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-02365 (N.D. Tex.,
September 6, 2018), seeks to recover overtime compensation,
liquidated damages, attorney's fees, litigation costs, costs of
court, prejudgment and post-judgment interest under the provisions
of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.
Defendants are in the commercial construction business in Dallas
Texas where Miller was employed as a heavy equipment operator from
March 2016 through April 2018, consistently working over forty
hours per week without overtime premiums. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglas B. Welmaker, Esq.
WELMAKER LAW PLLC
Austin, TX 78715
Phone: (512) 799-2048
Fax: (512) 253-2969
Email: doug@welmakerlaw.com
DSW INNS LLC: Hotel not Wheelchair Accessible, Neal Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
Spencer Neal, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, vs. DSW Inns, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
18-cv-00997 (N.D. Ohio, September 5, 2018), seeks injunctive
relief, attorney’s fees, litigation expenses, and costs pursuant
to the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Defendant owns, operates the "Drury Inn," located at 6170
Parkcenter Circle, Dublin, Ohio. Neal is paralyzed as a result of
spina bifida and relies on a wheelchair to ambulate. Neal visited
the property on August 7, 2018, but encountered architectural
barriers at the property. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Colin G. Meeker, Esq.
BLAKEMORE, MEEKER & BOWLER CO., L.P.A.
495 Portage Lakes Dr.
Akron, OH 44319
Telephone: (330) 253-3337
Facsimile: (330) 253-4131
Email: cgm@bmblaw.com
EAMON GUILFOYLE: Rodriguez Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay
--------------------------------------------------------
Arsenio Rodriguez and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v.
Eamon Guilfoyle, individually, Defendant, Case No. 18-cv-23621,
(S.D. Fla., September 5, 2018) seeks to recover unpaid overtime and
minimum wage, as well as an additional amount as liquidated
damages, costs and reasonable attorney's fees pursuant to the Fair
Labor Standards Act.
Guilfoyle owns and operates the "Playwright Irish Pub" located in
Miami Beach, Florida where Rodriguez worked as a busser. Rodriguez
routinely worked for Guilfoyle for 48 hours per week, without being
paid for the eight hours overtime, says the complaint. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Henry Hernandez, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF HENRY HERNANDEZ, P.A.
2655 Le Jeune Road, Suite 802
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Tel: (305) 771-3374
Email: Henry@HHLAWFLORIDA.com
- and -
Monica Espino, Esq.
ESPINO LAW, PL
2655 S. LeJeune Road, Suite 802
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Tel: (305) 704-3172
Fax: (305) 722-7378
Email: me@espino-law.com
FINANCE SYSTEM: Bazile Disputes Collection Letter
-------------------------------------------------
Sandra Bazile, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Finance System of Green Bay, Inc., a
Wisconsin Corporation and John Does, Defendants, Case No.
18-cv-01415, (E.D. Wis., September 11, 2018) seeks statutory
damages, attorney's fees, litigation expenses and costs pursuant to
the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
Finance System of Green Bay is a debt collector who attempted to
collect a debt owed by Bazile to Baycare Healthcare Systems via a
collection letter. However, said latter did not disclose that the
amount of the debt may increase due to the accrual of interest,
says the complaint. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Philip D. Stern, Esq.
Andrew T. Thomasson, Esq.
Francis R. Greene, Esq.
STERN THOMASSON LLP
150 Morris Avenue, 2nd Floor
Springfield, NJ 07081
Telephone (973) 379-7500
E-mail: Philip@SternThomasson.com
Andrew@SternThomasson.com
Francis@SternThomasson.com
FIRST TRANSIT: Denies Payment for Off-the-Clock Work, Stewart Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Stewart, for himself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, v. First Transit, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 18-cv-03768,
(E.D. Pa., September 5, 2018), seeks to recover overtime premium
wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and the
Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act of 1968.
First Transit is a private sector provider of public transit
management and contracting in North America with over 47,000
vehicles from more than 310 locations across the U.S. and Canada.
It provides fixed route bus services, paratransit services, shuttle
bus services and vehicle maintenance services. Stewart worked as a
full-time, hourly Paratransit driver from the First Transit depot
at 2500 Wheat Sheaf Lane in Philadelphia, PA. He claims to be
unpaid for off-the-clock work when doing jobs outside actual
driving. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
David J. Cohen, Esq.
STEPHAN ZOURAS, LLP
604 Spruce Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Tel: (215) 873-4836
Email: dcohen@stephanzouras.com
- and -
James B. Zouras, Esq.
Ryan F. Stephan, Esq.
STEPHAN ZOURAS, LLP
205 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 2560
Chicago, IL 60601
Tel: (312) 233-1550
Website: www.stephanzouras.com
FREMONT CO: Savage Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------
Pamela Savage, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. The Fremont Company, Defendants, Case No.
18-cv-02061, (N.D. Ohio, September 10, 2018), seeks unpaid overtime
compensation, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees and costs under
the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage
Standards Act.
Freemont specializes in the manufacture of tomato-based sauces,
pickled vegetables and other specialty foods where Savage worked as
an hourly worker. She claims overtime pay for pre-work and
post-work activities which were not counted in her work hours,
including donning and/or doffing their personal protective
equipment and sanitary clothing, time spent washing their hands at
the designated hand-washing station and associated travel.
Additionally, Defendant regularly rounded down time that they
worked past their scheduled shift. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Hans A. Nilges, Esq.
Shannon M. Draher, Esq.
NILGES DRAHER LLC
7266 Portage Street, N.W., Suite D
Massillon, OH 44646
Telephone: (330) 470-4428
Facsimile: (330) 754-1430
Email: hans@ohlaborlaw.com
sdraher@ohlaborlaw.com
GENERAL MOTORS: Car Owners Sue Over Defective Engine Oil System
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ellen Berman and Dayana Guach on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. General Motors LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company, Defendant, Case No.
18-cv-14371, (S.D. Fla., September 10, 2018) seeks to enjoin
General Motors from further deceptive distribution, sales and lease
of defective vehicles; seeks replacement/recall; seeks
compensatory, actual, exemplary and statutory damages, including
interest, attorneys' fees and costs; and seeks prejudgment and
post-judgment interest and any and all remedies provided pursuant
to Florida's Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act.
General Motors is alleged of manufacturing engines with faulty
piston rings causing the engine oil to improperly burn off and
resulting in premature ring wear. This was particularly evident in
their EcoTec 2.4L engines, notes the complaint.
Both Berman and Guach purchased a Chevrolet Equinox containing the
said engine. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory F. Coleman, Esq.
Adam A. Edwards, Esq.
Mark E. Silvey, Esq.
Rachel Soffin, Esq.
GREG COLEMAN LAW PC
800 S. Gay Street, Suite 1100
Knoxville, TN 37929
Telephone: (865) 247-0080
Facsimile: (865) 522-0049
Email: rachel@gregcolemanlaw.com
greg@gregcolemanlaw.com
adam@gregcolemanlaw.com
mark@gregcolemanlaw.com
- and -
Robert R. Ahdoot, Esq.
AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC
10728 Lindbrook Drive
Los Angeles, CA 90024
Telephone: (310) 474-9111
Facsimile: (310) 474-8585
Email: rahdoot@ahdootwolfson.com
- and -
Daniel K. Bryson, Esq.
John Hunter Bryson, Esq.
WHITFIELD BRYSON &MASON LLP
900 W. Morgan Street
Raleigh, NC 27603
Tel: (919) 600-5000
Fax: (919) 600-5035
Email: dan@wbmllp.com
hunter@wbmllp.com
GENWORTH LIFE: TVPX ARS Files Suit in E.D. Virginia
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Genworth Life and
Annuity Insurance Company. The case is styled as TVPX ARS Inc. as
Securities Intermediary for Consolidated Wealth Management, Ltd.,
on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v.
Genworth Life and Annuity Insurance Company, Defendant, Case No.
3:18-cv-00637-JAG (E.D. Va., Sept. 19, 2018).
The cause of action is stated as Diversity-Insurance Contract.
Genworth Life and Annuity Insurance Company offers annuity and life
insurance underwriting services in the United States. It operates
in two segments: Retirement Income and Institutional, and
Protection. The Retirement Income and Institutional segment offers
various forms of wealth accumulation, income distribution, and
institutional investment products, which principally comprise fixed
and variable deferred and immediate individual annuities, and group
variable annuities.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David John Gogal, Esq.
Blankingship & Keith PC
4020 University Dr, Suite 300
Fairfax, VA 22030
Phone: (703) 691-1235
Email: dgogal@bklawva.com
- and -
Laurie Lea Kirkland, Esq.
Blankingship & Keith PC(Fairfax)
4020 University Dr, Suite 300
Fairfax, VA 22030
Phone: (703) 691-1235
Fax: (703) 691-3913
Email: lkirkland@bklawva.com
GRAY TELEVISION: Curb Appeal Suit Asserts Air-time Price Rigging
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Curb Appeal Madison LLC, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Gray Television, Inc., Hearst
Corporation, Nexstar Media Group, Inc., Tegna Inc., Tribune Media
Company and Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc., Defendants, Case No.
18-cv-06190 (C.D. Cal., September 10, 2018), seeks damages,
injunctive relief and other relief for violation of Section 1 of
the Sherman Act.
Defendants are media companies who are accused by the Plaintiff of
conspiring to fix, raise, stabilize, and maintain prices for
commercials to be aired on broadcast television stations throughout
the United States by sharing competitively sensitive information
through their advertising sales teams.
Curb Appeal Madison LLC is a landscaping company located in
Madison, Wisconsin. It purchased TV ad time from one or more of the
Defendants. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Kenneth A. Wexler, Esq.
Bethany R. Turke, Esq.
Justin N. Boley, Esq.
WEXLER WALLACE LLP
55 West Monroe Street, Suite 3300
Chicago, IL 60603
Tel: 312-346-2222
Fax: 312-346-0022
Email: kaw@wexlerwallace.com
brtr@,wexlerwallace.com
jnb@wexlerwallace.com
- and -
Daniel E. Gustafson, Esq.
Daniel C. Hedlund, Esq.
Michelle J. Looby, Esq.
Brittany N. Resch, Esq.
GUSTAFSON GLUEK PLLC
Canadian Pacific Plaza
120 S. Sixth St., Suite 2600
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Tel: (612) 333-8844
Fax: (612) 339-6622
Email: dgustafson@gustafsongluek.com
dhedlund@gustafsongluek.com
mlooby@gustafsongluek.com
bresch@gustafsongluek.com
- and -
Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
TURKE & STRAUSS LLP
613 Williamson Street, Suite 201
Madison, WI 53703
Telephone: (608) 237-1775
Facsimile: (608) 509-4423
Email: sam@turkestrauss.com
GRAY TELEVISION: HVAC Company Hits Air-time Price Rigging
---------------------------------------------------------
One Source Heating & Cooling, LLC, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Gray Television, Inc.,
Hearst Communications Inc., Nexstar Media Group, Inc., Sinclair
Broadcast Group, Inc., Tegna, Inc., Tribune Media Company And
Tribune Broadcasting Company, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-02765
(D. Md., September 7, 2018), seeks damages, injunctive relief and
other relief for violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act.
Defendants are media companies who are accused by the Plaintiff of
conspiring to fix, raise, stabilize, and maintain prices for
commercials to be aired on broadcast television stations throughout
the United States by sharing competitively sensitive information
through their advertising sales teams.
One Source Heating & Cooling, LLC is a heating, cooling, and HVAC
services provider located in Birmingham and Dothan, Alabama, and is
a direct purchaser of television advertising from Sinclair. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Jonathan Schochor, Esq.
Philip Federico, Esq.
SCHOCHOR, FEDERICO & STATON, P.A.
1211 St. Paul Street
Baltimore, MD 21202
Tel: (410) 234-1000
Fax: (410) 234–1010
E-mail: jschochor@sfspa.com
- and -
Lesley E. Weaver, Esq.
BLEICHMAR FONTI & AULD LLP
555 12th Street, Suite 1600
Oakland, CA 94607
Tel: (415) 445-4003
Fax: (415) 445-4004
E-mail: lweaver@bfalaw.com
- and -
Jayne Conroy, Esq.
SIMMONS HANLY CONROY
112 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10016
Tel: (212) 784-6402
Fax: (212) 213-5949
E-mail: jconroy@simmonsfirm.com
- and -
James M. Terrell, Esq.
METHVIN TERRELL, P.C.
2201 Arlington Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Tel: (205) 939-0199
Fax: (205) 939-0399
E-mail: jterrell@mmlaw.net
GROUP NINE MEDIA: Sullivan Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Group Nine Media,
Inc. The case is styled as Phillip Sullivan, Jr. on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Group Nine
Media, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-08554 (S.D. N.Y., Sept.
19, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act of 1990.
Group Nine Media operates as a holding company. The company,
through its subsidiaries, offers digital advertising and marketing
solutions. It is a digital media holding company based in New York
City. The company comprises Thrillist, NowThis, The Dodo, and
Seeker. The four brands and former brand Sourcefed, merged to form
Group Nine Media in October 2016.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
C.K. Lee, Esq.
Lee Litigation Group, PLLC
30 East 39th Street
2nd Floor
New York, NY 10016
Phone: (212) 465-1188
Fax: (212) 465-1181
Email: cklee@leelitigation.com
GULF COAST HOSPITALITY: Wheeler Seeks Unpaid Minimum Wages
----------------------------------------------------------
Marina Wheeler individually, and as class representatives of others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Gulf Coast Hospitality Group,
Inc. and Craig Munroe, Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-02240, (M.D.
Fla., September 10, 2018), seeks to recover from Defendants unpaid
overtime wages, monies due and owing, liquidated damages and
reasonable attorneys' fees and costs for violations of the minimum
wage provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Gulf Coast Hospitality operates "Shark Tales," a restaurant located
at 677 75th Ave, St. Pete Beach, FL 33706 where Wheeler was
employed as a bartender/server from approximately June 20, 2018
until July 21, 2018. She seeks unpaid minimum wages. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Peter L. Tragos, Esq.
Peter A. Sartes, Esq.
TRAGOS, SARTBS & TRAGOS, PLLC
601 Cleveland Street, Suite 800
Clearwater, FL 33755
Tel: (727) 441-9030
Facsimile: (727) 441-9254
Email: petertragos@greeklaw.com
peter@greeklaw.com
yaima@greeklaw.com
HEAD NO TAIL: Truck Drivers Seek Unpaid Wages
---------------------------------------------
The case captioned Eluder Samon Perez, Sergio Alarcon Hernandez,
individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff,
vs. Head No Tail Inc. and Juan Rodriguez, Case No. 77391446 filed
in the Circuit Court of the 13th Judicial Circuit in Hillsborough
County, Fla. on September 4, 2018, seeks to recover minimum wages,
liquidated damages, prejudgment interest, post-judgment interest,
costs, attorney's fees, declaratory and injunctive relief and any
other such relief pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Plaintiffs worked for the Defendants as truck drivers. They seek
unpaid wages for their last two weeks of work as Defendants' pay
check bounced. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Scott L. Terry, Esq.
Wolfgang M. Florin, Esq.
FLORIN, GRAY, BOUZAS, OWENS, LLC
Pointe Village Drive, Suite 100
Lutz, FL 33558
Telephone (727) 254-5255
Facsimile (727) 483-7942
Email: sterry@fgbolaw.com
debbie@fgbolaw.com
wolfgang@fgbolaw.com
HELIX ENERGY: Employees File Suit Over Racial Discrimination
------------------------------------------------------------
Fabian Shaw, Collins Kwabena and Dale Duclion, on behalf of himself
and others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, V. Helix Energy
Solutions Group, Inc. and Helix Well Ops Inc., Defendants, Case No.
18-cv-03200, (S.D. Tex., September 10, 2018) seeks declaratory
injunctive and other equitable relief, compensatory and punitive
damages from discrimination and retaliation against black employees
in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as
amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991 and declaratory; as well as
injunctive and other equitable relief and compensatory and punitive
damages under Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1871.
Helix Energy Solutions Inc. -- www.helixesg.com -- is an oil and
gas services company headquartered in Houston, Texas. It is a
global provider of offshore services in well intervention and
operations of new and existing oil and gas fields.
Shaw and Kwabena are black derrickmen who were both passed up for
promotions in favor of less qualified and less experienced white
employees. They were also subjected to racial slurs and offensive
and derogatory remarks about black employees, says the complaint.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Terrence B. Robinson, Esq.
Laura A. Hernandez, Esq.
TB Robinson Law Group, PLLC
7500 San Felipe St., Suite 800
Houston, TX 77063
Phone: (713) 568-1723
Facsimile: (713) 965-4288
Email: TRobinson@TBRobinsonlaw.com
LHernandez@TBRobinsonlaw.com
HELIX ENERGY: Wilson Action to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel V. Wilson, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, V. Helix Energy Solutions Group, Inc. and
Helix Well Ops Inc., Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-03100, (S.D. Tex.,
August 31, 2018) seeks to recover actual damages in the amount of
unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages, prejudgment and
post-judgment interest, court costs, and reasonable attorneys' fees
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Helix Energy Solutions Inc. -- www.helixesg.com -- is an oil and
gas services company headquartered in Houston, Texas. It is a
global provider of offshore services in well intervention and ROV
operations of new and existing oil and gas fields. Wilson worked as
a Rig Superintendent for Helix, routinely working 84 hours per week
without overtime pay, notes the complaint. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Edwin Sullivan, Esq.
OBERTI SULLIVAN LLP
712 Main Street, Suite 900
Houston, TX 77002
Tel: (713) 401-3555
Fax: (713) 401-3547
Email: ed@osattorneys.com
- and -
Mark J. Oberti, Esq.
OBERTI SULLIVAN LLP
712 Main Street, Suite 900
Houston, TX 77002
Tel: (713) 401-3555
Fax: (713) 401-3547
Email: mark@osattorneys.com
ILLY CAFFE SF: Goldboss Sues Over Illegal Surcharges
----------------------------------------------------
Lauren Goldboss, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Illy Caffe San Francisco LLC and Does 1 to
25, inclusive, Defendant, Case No. 18-569408 (Cal. Super. Ct.,
September 4, 2018), seeks redress for breach of contract, breach of
duty of good faith and fair dealing, negligent misrepresentation,
intentional misrepresentation, conversion, concealment and
violation of the California Business and Profession Code resulting
from undisclosed, unauthorized and unlawful billing practices.
Defendant operates as Illy Cafe, a restaurant in San Francisco.
Instead of raising their menu prices, they illegally added an
unlawful surcharge onto a customer's bill, asserts the complaint.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua Bordin-Wosk, Esq.
Shannon Guevara, Esq.
Talissa Mulholland, Esq.
BB LAW GROUP LLP
6100 Center Drive, Suite 1100
Howard Hughes Center
Los Angeles, CA 90045
Telephone: (323) 925-7800
Facsimile: (323) 925-7801
Email: JBordinWosk@BBLawGroupLLP.com
SGuevara@BBLawGroupLLP.com
TMulholland@BBLawGroupLLP.com
INKSTER, MI: Court Narrows Claims in Garner Suit
------------------------------------------------
In the case, GARNER PROPERTIES & MANAGEMENT LLC, CHRISTOPHER L.
GARNER; and OLIVIA HEMARATANATORN, Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF INKSTER;
GINA TRIPLETT; MCKENNA ASSOCIATES, INC.; and JIM WRIGHT,
Defendants, Case No. 17-cv-13960 (E.D. Mich.), Judge Paul D. Borman
of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan,
Southern Division, (i) granted in part and denied in part the City
of Inkster and Triplett's motion to dismiss; (ii) granted McKenna
and Wright's motion to dismiss Counts I and II of the Plaintiffs'
Complaint; and (iii) granted the Plaintiff leave to amend Count I
of the Complaint to correct a singular pleading error.
The Plaintiffs have filed the putative class action against the
City of Inkster, Gina Triplett, McKenna Associates, Inc. and Jim
Wright, for the alleged unconstitutional levy of penalties and
fines, and threats of imprisonment, for alleged violations of
certain City of Inkster rental property codes and ordinances. The
Plaintiffs bring the putative class action on behalf of a class of
persons who own residential real property in the City of Inkster
and have been fined for failing to have a certificate of occupancy
for a rental property.
The Plaintiffs allege that under the Home Rule City Ac, municipal
entities like the City, are empowered to adopt certain laws, codes,
or rules for building maintenance control in their jurisdictions.
Pursuant to this authority, the City has adopted the International
Property Maintenance Code ("IPMC") through City Ordinance Section
150.001, to regulate and govern the conditions and maintenance of
all property, buildings and structures by providing the standards
for supplied utilities and facilities and other physical things and
conditions essential to ensure that structures are safe, sanitary
and fit for occupation and use.
They Plaintiffs further allege that the City has enacted other
ordinances that regulate the operation of rental housing within the
City that require an owner of investment real estate who wants to
rent property to register the property, obtain an inspection of the
property, complete necessary repairs under the applicable code, and
thereafter obtain a certificate of compliance. The City's
inspection under these ordinances is governed by the City's
adoption of the IPMC, and inspection requires compliance with the
IPMC such that an owner of rental property cannot obtain a
certificate of compliance from the City until he or she passes an
inspection pursuant to the IPMC.
The Complaint alleges that the IPMC contains its own set of
procedural guidelines that the City must comply with, such as the
provision that a prosecution for violations for a failure to
comport with an inspection performed under the IPMC cannot be
initiated until a person has failed to comply with a notice of
violation served in accordance with Section 107 of the IPMC. The
Plaintiffs allege that despite these procedural guidelines required
by the IPMC, the City refuses to comply with them and instead
issues civil infraction fines and misdemeanor violations to the
owners for failure to bring properties in compliance with the IPMC
by issuing tickets for failing to obtain a certificate of occupancy
under the City's local ordinances, without regard to the Notice
requirements of the IPMC.
Finally, the Plaintiffs allege that the inspection provisions of
the IPMC, both facially and as applied by the City, violate the
Fourth Amendment guarantee against unreasonable searches because
the code allegedly permits the City to conduct random searches for
code violations, which carry criminal penalties, without a warrant
and without reasonable suspicion.
Plaintiffs' allegations essentially group into three separate
claims: (1) deprivation of due process by property owners for
failure to notify them of their right to appeal and failure to
maintain a board of appeals to hear appeals from code violations
and to enforce the stay provision of the IPMC; (2) deprivation of
due process, and Fourth Amendment violation for lack of probable
cause, by individual members of certain property management
business entities (LLCs and corporations) who are not property
owners and are being personally charged with criminal violations
when the City (and Triplett individually) have knowledge that these
individuals are simply "members" or "employees" of a property
management company and are not the legally responsible entity; and
(3) unconstitutionality, both facial and as applied, of provisions
of the Inkster City Code that permit home inspections without a
warrant or reasonable suspicion for the purpose of detecting code
violations.
Specifically, Count One alleges a violation of the due process
rights of homeowners based upon the lack of notice to them of their
right to appeal determinations of a code official under the IPMC.
Count Two alleges "due process" violations and "lack of probable
cause" to institute criminal proceedings against non-owners of
rental properties. Count Three alleges a violation of due process
rights of both owners and non-owners of real property due to the
City's failure to create a board of appeals as required under the
IPMC to challenge the strict liability determinations and failure
to institute the stay of enforcement required under the IPMC in the
instance of an appeal. Count Four challenges the provisions of the
IPMC (Section 104.3) pursuant to which the City allegedly conducts
warrantless searches of rental properties without reasonable cause
as unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment, both facially and
as applied. Count Five, captioned "Individual Liability of the
Defendants," sets forth allegations specific to the individual
Defendants, Triplett and Wright, and their personal involvement in
the unconstitutional conduct alleged in the Complaint. Count Six
(Assumpsit) has been voluntarily dismissed by the Plaintiffs.
Count Seven, captioned "Municipal Liability," sets forth
allegations on behalf of homeowners specific to the alleged policy
and customs of the City in carrying out the unconstitutional acts
alleged in the Complaint. Count Eight, captioned "Unconstitutional
Conditions Doctrine," alleges that the City uses its mandatory
inspection and rental ordinances to force homeowners to relinquish
their constitutional rights to be free from unreasonable searches
and seizures and to force non-owners to relinquish their right to
rent property in the City or face civil and criminal penalties.
Counts Nine and Ten seek injunctive and declaratory relief,
respectively, with respect to the conduct alleged in the Complaint
. Count Eleven, captioned "Violation of 42 U.S.C. Section 1983,"
reasserts a claim for deprivation of due process under that statute
and seeks attorneys fees. Counts Twelve through Fifteen allege the
following state law claims, respectively: Malicious Prosecution (by
non-owners/property managers as to whom City lacked probable cause
to issue violations), Abuse of Process (same factual basis as
Malicious Prosecution), Assumpsit/Unjust Enrichment/Restitution
(for illegal extraction of fines and fees), and Defamation Per Se
(for allegedly defamatory statements made in connection with
charging Plaintiffs with criminal conduct).
Triplett now moves, under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), to dismiss all
claims against her on the basis of qualified immunity and the City
moves for partial dismissal, also pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
12(b)(6), of Count I (Violation of Due Process), Count VI
(Assumpsit), and all state law claims, i.e. Counts XII (Malicious
Prosecution), XIII (Abuse of Process), XIV (Assumpsit/Unjust
Enrichment/Restitution), and XV (Defamation Per Se). (ECF No. 20,
City and Triplett's Mot. 7.) Defendants McKenna and Wright move
separately, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), to dismiss Counts
I and II of the Plaintiffs' Complaint.
The Court held a hearing on June 15, 2018.
Judge Borman (i) granted Triplett's motion to dismiss, on the basis
of qualified immunity, the Plaintiffs' claims against her alleging
a due process violation based upon her issuance of Notices of
Violation that did not contain information regarding a right to
appeal;
(ii) denied Triplett and the City's motion to Dismiss Count II;
(iii) granted the City's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' state law
claims (Counts XII-XV); (iv) granted Defendants Wright and
McKenna's Motion to Dismiss Count II of Plaintiffs' Complaint; (v)
granted the Defendants' motions to dismiss Count I of the Complaint
but granted the Plaintiffs leave to amend Count I of the Complaint.
The Judge ordered that the Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint,
consistent with the Opinion and Order, will be filed within 14 days
of the date of his Opinion and Order. The Plaintiffs' Amended
Complaint will also specify which of the remaining Counts of the
Complaint are asserted against which specific Defendants.
A full-text copy of the Court's Aug. 15, 2018 Opinion and Order is
available at https://is.gd/axUi6u from Leagle.com.
Christopher Garner, Olivia Hemaratanatorn & Garner Properties &
Management, LLC, Plaintiffs, represented by Mark K. Wasvary --
mark@wasvarylaw.com -- Becker and Wasvary & Aaron D. Cox --
aaron@aaroncoxlaw.com -- Law Offices of Aaron D. Cox PLLC.
City of Inkster & Gina Triplett, Defendants, represented by David
W. Jones, Allen Brothers & Neil B. Pioch, Allen Brothers, PLLC.
McKenna Associates, Inc. & Jim Wright, Defendants, represented by
Gregory I. Thomas, Thomas, DeGrood, Kevin G. Thomas --
sue4it@thethomases.us -- Thomas DeGrood & Witcroff, Michelle A.
Thomas, Thomas, DeGrood & Stephen L. Witenoff, Thomas, DeGrood.
J&M TOWING INC: Borges Sues Over Illegal Towing Fees
----------------------------------------------------
David Borges, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. J&M Towing, Inc., Defendant, Case No.
18-cv-02531, (D. Mass., September 4, 2018), seeks damages and any
further relief for violation of Massachusetts General Law.
J&M is a towing company which provides towing, transportation, road
service and repairs to individuals and businesses in Massachusetts.
On or about July 12, 2018, J & M towed Borges' vehicle and stored
it at their Ashland facility and charged him $609 inclusive of a
fuel surcharge factor without showing it on the tow slip. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
John R. Yasi, Esq.
Brian P. McNiff, Esq.
Forrest, LaMothe, Mazow, McCullough, Yasi & Yasi, P.C.
2 Salem Green, Suite 2
Salem, MA 01970
Tel: (617) 231-7829
Email: jyasi@forrestlamothe.com
bmcniff@forrestlarnothe.com
JOHNSON CONTROLS: Court Denies Bid to Certify Hostetler Class
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the case, AMOS HOSTETLER, et al., Plaintiffs, v. JOHNSON
CONTROLS, INC, et al., Defendants, Case No. 3:15-CV-226 JD (N.D.
Ind.), Judge Jon E. DeGuilio of the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division, denied the
Plaintiffs' motion for class certification.
The case is an environmental action over contamination that was
released at a factory and has since migrated to neighboring
properties. The Plaintiffs, five individuals who live in that
neighborhood, seek damages for illnesses (or increased risks of
future illness) that they suffered because of their exposure to the
contamination. They also seek an injunction requiring the
contamination to be cleaned up.
In addition to asserting claims on their own behalf, they seek
class certification of "liability-related" issues that they assert
would be common to potential claims by others in their neighborhood
who have been affected by the same contamination. They moved to
certify a class of everyone who has owned, rented, or occupied
property in the area at any time from 1992 through May 2014.
The Plaintiffs propose to address seven specific issues on a
class-wide basis. They do not contend that those issues would
resolve any of the class members' claims in whole, or even
establish the defendants' liability; they concede that once the
class issues have been resolved, individual trials would be
necessary to establish, as to each class member, whether the
Defendants are liable on any of the claims, whether the class
member has been exposed to and injured by the contamination, and
the amount of damages owed for that injury. The Plaintiffs admit
that, even with the benefit of the initial class proceedings, each
of those separate trials would be complex and costly, requiring
expert testimony to establish both the individuals' exposure to
contamination and a causal link between that exposure and the
individuals' injuries. However, the Plaintiffs contend that the
issues they have identified can be resolved on a classwide basis,
and that doing so will facilitate and narrow the issues to be
resolved in the individual trials.
Johnson Controls also filed a motion to strike certain opinions
offered by the Plaintiffs' expert, Dr. Keramida. It first moves to
strike Dr. Keramida's opinion that there is (or was) a completed
vapor intrusion pathway for all 128 current and former structures
in the Class Area. That opinion is not critical to the motion for
class certification for a simple reason: the Plaintiffs do not
offer or rely on that opinion in support of their motion.
To the contrary, Judge DeGuilio finds that they expressly disclaim
such an opinion at this stage. Dr. Keramida does not intend to
testify that a 'completed pathway' exists today at every home
within the Class Area. All the Plaintiffs argue at this stage is
that contamination exists somewhere, in some amount, below the
ground in the properties within the class area. Since the opinion
that Johnson Controls moved to strike is not one that the
Plaintiffs offered in support of certification, the Judge holds he
needs not rule on the merits of the motion.
The Plaintiffs have filed three motions to strike. One seeks to
strike a declaration by defense counsel's paralegal, who they
characterize as offering expert opinions. The two motions seek to
strike the opinions and affidavits of Johnson Controls' two
retained experts. Again, the Judge needs not resolve those
motions. Even accepting the evidence the Plaintiffs offer in
support of class certification, they have not met their burden of
establishing that any of the issues in question are appropriate for
class certification. Thus, he needs not reach the evidence that
Johnson Controls has submitted to contradict the Plaintiffs'
assertions. And for that same reason, he will deny the Plaintiffs'
motion for an evidentiary hearing, as no disputed issues of fact
would affect the outcome of the motion for class certification.
As to the motion for class certification, Judge DeGuilio finds that
the Plaintiffs have failed to meet their burden of showing that the
issues in question are appropriate for class certification under
the circumstances of the case. As to several issues, the
Plaintiffs have defined the class so broadly, in an attempt to
sweep in as many class members as possible, that the issues they
propose for certification are not common to the members of that
class. Other issues they propose are either insubstantial and
undisputed, or would stop short of resolving the relevant issue and
would have to be revisited on a class-member-by-class-member basis
in the subsequent proceedings. Those issues thus would not drive
the resolution of any claims or meaningfully simplify the
individual trials.
For these reasons, the Judge denied the motion for class
certification; (ii) granted in part and denied in part Johnson
Controls' motion to strike Dr. Keramida's opinion; and (iii) denied
the remaining motions to strike and the motion for an evidentiary
hearing.
A full-text copy of the Court's Aug. 15, 2018 Opinion and Order is
available at https://is.gd/ow3jjq from Leagle.com.
Gene Duffin, Senior Judge, Special Master, pro se.
Amos Hostetler, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated, Debbie Hostetler, on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated, Rita Chairez, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, Becky Null, on behalf of themselves and
all others similarly situated & Maria Tovar, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
represented by John D. Ulmer -- julmer@yaub.com -- Yoder Ainlay
Ulmer & Buckingham LLP, Michael P. O'Neil, Esq. --
moneil@taftlaw.com -- Thomas A. Barnard, Esq. --
tbarnard@taftlaw.com -- Melissa A. Gardner, Esq. --
mgardner@taftlaw.com -- and Rodney L. Michael, Jr., Esq. --
rmichael@taftlaw.com -- TAFT STETTINIUS & HOLLISTER LLP.
Johnson Controls Inc, Defendant, Andrew E. Skroback, Esq. --
andrew.skroback@btlaw.com -- Lauren T. Lee, Esq. --
william.lee@btlaw.com -- Scott W. Coyle, Esq. --
scott.coyle@btlaw.com -- and Thomas Joseph Hall, Esq. --
thomas.hall@btlaw.com -- BARNES & THORNBURG LLP
Tocon Holdings LLC, Defendant, pro se.
Yoder Ainlay Ulmer & Buckingham, Defendant, represented by Daniel
W. Glavin, O'Neill McFadden & Willett LLP & Michael E. O'Neill,
O'Neill McFadden & Willett LLP.
Johnson Controls Inc, Cross Defendant, represented by Andrew E.
Skroback, Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP, pro hac vice, Lauren T.
Lee, Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP, pro hac vice, Thomas Joseph
Hall, Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP, pro hac vice & Kelly J.
Hartzler, Barnes & Thornburg LLP.
Johnson Controls Inc, Counter Claimant, represented by Andrew E.
Skroback, Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP, pro hac vice, Lauren T.
Lee, Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP, pro hac vice, Thomas Joseph
Hall, Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP, pro hac vice & Kelly J.
Hartzler, Barnes & Thornburg LLP.
KNORR-BREMSE AG: Agostini Sues Over Anti-poaching Policy
--------------------------------------------------------
Joann Agostini, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, v. Knorr-Bremse AG, Knorr Brake Company, New
York Air Brake LLC, Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies
Corporation, and Faiveley Transport North America Inc., Defendants,
Case No. 18-cv-01206 (W.D. Pa., September 11, 2018), seeks to
recover damages and obtain injunctive relief for injuries caused
under Section 1 of the Sherman Act.
Defendants and their related subsidiaries are rail equipment used
in freight and passenger rail applications suppliers who are
alleged of restraining competition in the labor markets in which
they compete for employees. Defendants are each other's top
competitors for rail equipment, including for skilled employees.
However, rather than compete to attract the best employees by
offering more attractive salary and benefits packages to
prospective job seekers, they instead conspired to enter into a
series of agreements intended to circumvent competition for
employees and suppress wages and job opportunities, thus
suppressing compensation and potential new job opportunities and
restraining competition in the market for their employees'
services.
Plaintiff worked for Wabtec from October 2005 through April 2016
and claims that she could have earned more. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Benjamin J. Sweet, Esq.
Gary F. Lynch, Esq.
Kelly K. Iverson, Esq.
CARLSON LYNCH SWEET KILPELA & CARPENTER, LLP
1133 Penn Avenue, 5th Floor
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
Telephone: (412) 322-9243
Facsimile: (412) 231-0246
Email: glynch@carlsonlynch.com
bsweet@carlsonlynch.com
kiverson@carlsonlynch.com
KNORR-BREMSE AG: Brand's Anti-trust Suit Transferred to W.D. Pa.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned John Brand, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Knorr-Bremse AG Knorr
Brake Company LLC, New York Air Brake LLC, Bendix Commercial
Vehicle Systems LLC, Westinghouse Air Brake Technologies
Corporation, Faiveley Transport S.A., Faiveley Transport North
America, Inc., Railroad Controls, L.P. Wabtec Railway Electronics,
Inc. and Xorail, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 18-cv-01193 (D. Md.,
July 23, 2018), was transferred to the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of Pennsylvania on September 10, 2018, under Case
No. 18-cv-02256.
Plaintiffs seeks to recover damages and obtain injunctive relief
for injuries caused under Section 1 of the Sherman Act.
Defendants and their related subsidiaries are rail equipment used
in freight and passenger rail applications suppliers who are
alleged of restraining competition in the labor markets in which
they compete for employees. Defendants are each other's top
competitors for rail equipment, including for skilled employees.
However, rather than compete to attract the best employees by
offering more attractive salary and benefits packages to
prospective job seekers, they instead conspired to enter into a
series of agreements intended to circumvent competition for
employees and suppress wages and job opportunities, thus
suppressing compensation and potential new job opportunities and
restraining competition in the market for their employees'
services.
Brand worked for Defendant New York Air Brake LLC as Senior Manager
of Systems and Software Engineering, in Irving, Texas. He applied
for employment at Wabtec as a Software Quality Manager but was not
contacted in response to his application. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Jennifer Duncan Hackett, Esq.
ZELLE LLP
1775 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 375
Washington, DC 20006
Tel: (202) 899-4100
Email: jhackett@zelle.com
L'OREAL USA: Court Certifies Classes in Matrix Biolage Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the case, BRANDI PRICE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. L'OREAL USA,
INC., et al., Defendants, Case No. 17 Civ. 614 (LGS) (S.D. N.Y.),
Judge Lorna G. Schofield of the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York granted in part and denied in part
the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification under Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3).
The Plaintiffs bring the putative consumer class action against the
Defendants. The Plaintiffs seek to bring fraud and unjust
enrichment claims on behalf of a nationwide class; and breach of
contract and warranty, and consumer protection claims on behalf of
New York and California classes under the laws of those states.
In February 2013, the Defendants launched a haircare product line
called Matrix Biolage Advanced Keratindose Pro-Keratin + Silk.
This product line comprises three products: Matrix Biolage Advanced
Keratin + Silk Shampoo, Pro-Keratin + Silk Conditioner and
Pro-Keratin + Silk Renewal Spray ("Challenged Products"). The
names of the Products ("Challenged Claims") are featured
prominently on the Product labels, and have not changed since the
launch of the Products. The only material change to the Products
or their packaging since their inception was an alteration of the
shape and size of the shampoo and conditioner bottles in late 2014
or early 2015.
The Plaintiffs are purchasers of the Products who assert that the
Challenged Claims would lead reasonable consumers to believe that
they contain keratin, when in fact they do not. Each Product is
typically priced at just over $20. Although the Defendants set a
wholesale price and a manufacturer's suggested retail price, they
have no control over the prices that retailers charge consumers for
the Products. The Plaintiffs assert that all consumers who
purchased the Products paid a price premium due to the Defendants'
purported misrepresentations on the Product labels.
The Defendants deny that the Challenged Claims are misleading and
that they had any effect on the pricing of the Products.
The Plaintiffs move to certify the following classes under Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3):
i. Nationwide Class: All persons in the United States and its
territories who purchased Matrix Biolage Advanced Keratindose
Pro-Keratin + Silk Shampoo, Pro-Keratin + Silk Conditioner, and/or
Pro-Keratin + Silk Renewal Spray between Jan. 26, 2013 and the
present;
ii. New York Class: All persons who reside in the state of New
York and purchased Matrix Biolage Advanced Keratindose Pro-Keratin
+ Silk Shampoo, Pro-Keratin + Silk Conditioner, and/or Pro-Keratin
+ Silk Renewal Spray between Jan. 26, 2013 and the present; and
iii. California Class: All persons who reside in the state of
California and purchased Matrix Biolage Advanced Keratindose
Pro-Keratin + Silk Shampoo, Pro-Keratin + Silk Conditioner, and/or
Pro-Keratin + Silk Renewal Spray between Jan. 26, 2013 and the
present.
Judge Schofield granted in part and denied in part the Plaintiffs'
motion for class certification under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 23(b)(3). She denied the motion to certify the
Nationwide Class. She granted in part and denied in part the
motion to certify the New York Class as follows:
a. The New York Class is defined as all persons who reside in
the state of New York and purchased Matrix Biolage Advanced
Keratindose Pro-Keratin + Silk Shampoo, Pro-Keratin + Silk
Conditioner, and/or Pro-Keratin + Silk Renewal Spray between Jan.
26, 2013 and the present.
b. The New York Class is certified only as to Count IX (New
York GBL Section 349) and the Breach of Contract claim under Count
II (not the alternative claim for Breach of Common Law Warranty).
c. Plaintiff Price is appointed as the class representative
for the New York Class.
The Judge granted in part and denied in part the motion to certify
the California Class as follows:
a. The California Class is defined as all persons who reside
in the state of California and purchased Matrix Biolage Advanced
Keratindose Pro-Keratin + Silk Shampoo, Pro-Keratin + Silk
Conditioner, and/or Pro-Keratin + Silk Renewal Spray between Jan.
26, 2013 and the present.
b. The California Class is certified only as to Counts III
(Express Warranty), VI (California UCL, Unfair Business Acts and
Practices Prong), VII (California UCL Fraudulent Business Acts and
Practices Prong), VIII (California UCL, Unlawful Prong), and X
(California FAL).
c. Plaintiff Chadwick is appointed as the class representative
for the California Class.
Morgan & Morgan; Barbat, Mansour & Suciu PLLC; Greg Coleman Law;
Sommers Schwartz P.C.; and JTB Law Group, LLC are appointed as the
co-class counsel.
By September 5, 2018, Plaintiffs shall, after conferring with the
Defendants, provide the Court with a joint proposed notice as
required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(c)(2), and explain
how they propose that notice will be made. The Clerk of Court is
respectfully directed to close the motion and Docket No. 146.
A full-text copy of the Court's Aug. 15, 2018 Order is available at
https://is.gd/QBUKmF from Leagle.com.
Brandi Price, on behalf of themselves and all other similarly
situated & Christine Chadwick, on behalf of themselves and all
other similarly situated, Plaintiffs, represented by Gregory F.
Coleman -- greg@gregcolemanlaw.com -- Greg Coleman Law PC, Jason
Travis Brown, JTB Law Group, LLC, Nick Suciu, III, Barbat Mansour &
Suciu PLLC, Adam A. Edwards, Greg Coleman Law PC, Jason Thompson --
jthompson@sommerspc.com -- Sommers Schwartz PC, Jonathan Betten
Cohen, Morgan & Morgan Complex Litigation Group, Mark E. Silvey,
Greg Coleman Law PC, Rachel L. Soffin, Morgan & Morgan, Rod M.
Johnston, Sommers Schwartz, P.C. & Patrick Sidney Almonrode, JTB
Law Group, LLC.
L'Oreal USA, Inc., Defendant, represented by Frederick Burdett
Warder, III -- fbwarder@pbwt.com -- Patterson, Belknap, Webb &
Tyler LLP & Maren Jessica Messing -- mmessing@pbwt.com --
Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler LLP.
Matrix Essentials, LLC, Defendant, represented by Frederick Burdett
Warder, III, Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler LLP, Lauren Capaccio
-- lcapaccio@shapiroarato.com -- Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler
LLP & Maren Jessica Messing, Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler LLP.
LIFEPOINT HEALTH: Wolf Seeks to Halt Merger Deal
-------------------------------------------------
Marcy Wolf, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Lifepoint Health, Inc., William F.
Carpenter Iii, Kermit R. Crawford, Richard H. Evans, Michael P.
Haley, Marguerite W. Kondracke, John E. Maupin, Jr., Jana R.
Schreuder and Reed V. Tuckerson, Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-01397,
(D. Del., September 7, 2018), seeks to enjoin defendants and all
persons acting in concert with them from proceeding with,
consummating or closing the acquisition of LifePoint Health, Inc.
by affiliates of RCCH HealthCare Partners, which is owned by
certain funds managed by affiliates of Apollo Global Management
LLC, rescinding it in the event defendants consummate the merger,
rescissory damages, costs of this action, including reasonable
allowance for plaintiff's attorneys' and experts' fees and such
other and further relief under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934.
LifePoint's stockholders will receive $65.00 in cash for each share
of the LifePoint common stock they hold.
According to the complaint, the proxy statement omitted the
analyses performed by the Company's financial advisor in connection
with the proposed transaction, Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC. It also
failed to disclose the estimated net debt and minority interest of
LifePoint, the estimated fully-diluted shares of LifePoint common
stock outstanding and the inputs and assumptions underlying the
stated discount rate, the range of illustrative terminal values for
LifePoint, LifePoint's net debt and minority interest, the inputs
and assumptions underlying the discount rates and the fully-diluted
shares of LifePoint common stock outstanding.
LifePoint is a healthcare company providing in-patient,
out-patient, and post-acute services through its subsidiaries that
own and operate community hospitals, regional health systems,
physician practices, outpatient centers and post-acute facilities
in twenty-two states. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Brian D. Long, Esq.
Gina M. Serra, Esq.
RIGRODSKY & LONG, P.A.
2 Righter Parkway, Suite 120
Wilmington, DE 19803
Tel: (302) 295-531
Facsimile: (302) 654-7530
Email: bdl@rl-legal.com
gms@rl-legal.com
- and -
Richard A. Maniskas, Esq.
RM LAW, P.C.
1055 Westlakes Dr., Ste. 3112
Berwyn, PA 19312
Tel: (484) 324-6800
Email: rm@maniskas.com
LITTLE CAESAR ENTERPRISES: Ogden Sues Over Anti-poaching Policy
---------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Ogden, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Little Caesar Enterprises, Inc. and LC
Trademarks, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-12792, (E.D. Mich.,
September 7, 2018) seeks to recover damages and obtain injunctive
relief for injuries caused under Section 1 of the Sherman Act.
Little Caesar is a pizza company with stores in all 50 U.S. states
and in multiple international markets with approximately 88% of its
more than 4,300 U.S. stores are franchise restaurants.
Ogden was employed by McMillan Properties, LLC, a Little Caesar
franchisee that owns and operates Little Caesar stores in and near
Murfreesboro, Tennessee. Ogden was employed by McMillan Properties
in job titles including crew member, assistant manager and
restaurant general manager.
Little Caesar franchisees have agreed not to compete with each
other with respect to manager hiring in explicit contractual terms
contained in franchisees' contracts. Ogden claims he had trouble
finding work in other locations after promoted to general manager.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
E. Powell Miller, Esq.
Sharon S. Almonrode, Esq.
Dennis A. Lienhardt, Esq.
THE MILLER LAW FIRM, PC
950 W. University Dr., Suite 300
Rochester, MI 48307
Tel: (248) 841-2200
Fax: (248) 652-2852
Email: epm@millerlawpc.com
ssa@millerlawpc.com
dal@millerlawpc.com
- and -
Derek Y. Brandt, Esq.
MCCUNE WRIGHT AREVALO, LLP
P.O. Box 487
Edwardsville, IL 62025
Tel: (618) 307-6116
Fax: (618) 307-6161
Email: dyb@mccunewright.com
- and -
Richard D. McCune, Esq.
MCCUNE WRIGHT AREVALO, LLP
3281 East Guasti Road, Suite 100
Ontario, CA 91761
Tel: (909) 557-1250
Fax: (909) 557-1275
Email: rdm@mccunewright.com
dcw@mccunewright.com
- and -
Walter W. Noss, Esq.
Stephanie A. Hackett, Esq.
Sean C. Russell, Esq.
SCOTT + SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP
600 West Broadway, Suite 3300
San Diego, CA 92101
Tel: (619) 233-4565
Email: wnoss@scott-scott.com
shackett@scott-scott.com
sean.russell@scott-scott.com
LMB MORTGAGE SERVICES: Aparicio Sues Over Illegal SMS Blasts
------------------------------------------------------------
Jorge Aparicio, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. LMB Mortgage Services, Inc., Defendants,
Case No. 18-cv-62137 (S.D. Fla., September 11, 2018), seeks
injunctive relief, statutory damages, legal or equitable remedies
resulting from violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection
Act.
LMB offers home loans, credit cards, auto and health insurance, and
long-distance and wireless services. It uses text messages as a
means of marketing its business and promoting its services to
consumers, thus causing unsolicited text messages to be sent to the
cellular subscribers resulting in aggravation, annoyance, intrusion
on seclusion, trespass and conversion. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq.
HIRALDO P.A.
401 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 400-4713
Email: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com
LOUIS LUTZ INC: Szucs Sues Kin Over Corporate Squabble
------------------------------------------------------
Margaret Szucs, individually and as trustee of the Louis Phillip
Lutz Trust dated October 15, 2002, and as shareholder of Louis
Lutz, Inc., on behalf of herself and all other shareholders
similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Jeffery L. Lutz, Sandra A. Lutz,
Lutz Cattle Enterprises, LLC, Bobby J. Lutz, Larry L. Lutz,
Defendants, Louis Lutz, Inc., Case No. 18-569408 (W.D. Mo.,
September 5, 2018), seeks to recoup corporate assets through a
constructive trust, claims damages (including actual and punitive),
interest, attorneys' fees and expenses, for the statutory,
declaratory, and equitable relief and for such other and further
relief resulting from breach of fiduciary duty and civil conspiracy
under Missouri Law.
Louis Lutz, Inc. is a family farming corporation organized under
Missouri law where Margaret Szucs is a shareholder of Louis Lutz,
Inc., owning 25% of the preferred (voting) shares and 20% of its
common shares. Louis Lutz, now deceased, was the father of Margaret
Szucs.
In 2002, Mrs. Szucs was voted off of the board and removed as
corporate secretary and replaced by Sandy Lutz. Since 2002, Mrs.
Szucs has been provided only limited information about the
corporation's finances and operations, including the co-mingling of
assets with Lutz Cattle Enterprises, LLC, a corporation formed in
2003 by Jeff and Sandy Lutz. Between 2013 and 2014, the board
caused the Corporation to sell and/or transfer various parcels of
land to Bobby Lutz, Larry Lutz and to Jeff and Sandy Lutz. The
Corporation has since then become deadlocked after some limited and
unsuccessful discussions regarding resolution of their dispute.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Todd H. Bartels, Esq.
POLSINELLI PC
3101 Frederick Avenue
St. Joseph, MO 64506
Tel: (816) 364-2117
Email: tbartels@polsinelli.com
LUBRIZOL ADVANCED: Kieu Fies FLSA Suit in C.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lubrizol Advanced
Materials, Inc. et al. The case is styled as Nghia Phuoc Kieu an
individual, on behalf of himself, and on behalf of all other
employees similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Lubrizol Advanced
Materials, Inc. a Delaware Corporation, Extrumed, Inc. doing
business as: dba Vesta a California Corporation, Does 1 through
100; inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 5:18-cv-02010 (C.D. Cal.,
Sept. 20, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Lubrizol Advanced Materials, Inc. produces and markets specialty
materials and chemicals used in various consumer and industrial
applications. The company operates in three segments: Consumer
Specialties, Specialty Materials, and Performance Coatings.
Consumer Specialties segment produces specialty chemicals targeting
the personal care, pharmaceutical, and food and beverage
industries.
ExtruMed, Inc. was acquired by Vesta Inc. as of March 6, 2009.
ExtruMed, Inc. designs, develops, and manufactures precision
extrusion solutions for the medical device industry. The company
offers multi-lumen, heat-shrink, co-extrusion, balloon, and lead
tubing, as well as irradiated balloon tubing and polyolefin heat
shrink tubing. It also provides annealing, tipping, mechanical
testing, pressure testing, process validations, and inventory
management services.[BN]
The Plaintiff appears pro se.
LUX COSMETIC: Lacked Time-keeping, Denied Olivera Overtime Pay
--------------------------------------------------------------
Joadys Olivera, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, vs. Lux Cosmetic Surgery Center Corp.,
Seduction Cosmetic Center Corp., New You Plastic Surgery & Spa
Corp., CG Beauty Plastic Surgery Corp., Jardon’s Medical For
Plastic & Bariatric Surgery Corp., Butterfly Cosmetic Center Corp.,
Luis R. Jardon individually and Gretel Jardon, individually,
Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-23637, (S.D. Fla., September 6, 2018),
seeks to recover monetary damages in the form of unpaid overtime
compensation, as well as an additional amount as liquidated
damages, and redress for deprivation of rights under the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
Defendants were in a joint enterprise in the ownership and
operation of a number of cosmetic and plastic surgery centers and
related businesses located in South Florida. They were joint
employers of Olivera, who worked for them from March 23, 2017 to
September 6, 2018 as an "Administrator."
The complaint says the Defendants did not keep time records of the
time worked by Olivera and did not pay her overtime even though she
was non-exempt and worked more than 40 hours per week in most, if
not all, of the weeks she worked. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Steven L. Schwarzberg, Esq.
SCHWARZBERG & ASSOCIATES
625 North Flagler Drive, Suite 600
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Telephone: (561) 659-3300
Facsimile: (561) 693-4540
Email: mail@schwarzberglaw.com
steve@schwarzberglaw.com
LUX COSMETIC: Lacked Time-keeping, Denied Rivera OT Wages
---------------------------------------------------------
Nadia Rivera, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, vs. Lux Cosmetic Surgery Center Corp.,
Seduction Cosmetic Center Corp., New You Plastic Surgery & Spa
Corp., CG Beauty Plastic Surgery Corp., Jardon’s Medical For
Plastic & Bariatric Surgery Corp., Butterfly Cosmetic Center Corp.,
Luis R. Jardon individually and Gretel Jardon, individually,
Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-23635, (S.D. Fla., September 6, 2018),
seeks to recover monetary damages in the form of unpaid overtime
compensation, as well as an additional amount as liquidated
damages, and redress for deprivation of rights under the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
Defendants were in a joint enterprise in the ownership and
operation of a number of cosmetic and plastic surgery centers and
related businesses located in South Florida. They were joint
employers of Rivera, who worked for them from March 23, 2017 to
September 6, 2018 as "Sales Manager." Defendants misclassified
Plaintiff as an independent contractor.
Defendants did not keep time records of the time worked by Rivera
and did not pay her overtime even though she was non-exempt and
worked more than 40 hours per week in most, if not all, of the
weeks she worked, says the complaint.[BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Steven L. Schwarzberg, Esq.
SCHWARZBERG & ASSOCIATES
625 North Flagler Drive, Suite 600
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Telephone: (561) 659-3300
Facsimile: (561) 693-4540
Email: mail@schwarzberglaw.com
steve@schwarzberglaw.com
M&A PROJECTS: Nyarko Seeks to Recover Unpaid or Underpaid Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
MALIK NYARKO and BOBAKARY JAITEH, in their individual capacities
and on behalf of others similarly situated v. M&A PROJECTS
RESTORATION INC., M&A PROJECTS INC., and BOGDAN MALINOWSKI, an
individual, Case No. 1:18-cv-05194 (E.D.N.Y., September 14, 2018),
seeks to recover alleged unpaid or underpaid wages and other
damages under the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act of
1938 and the New York Labor Law.
M&A Projects Restoration Inc. is a New York corporation doing
business within Kings County, and whose principal place of business
is located in Brooklyn, New York. Defendant M&A Projects Inc. is a
New York corporation doing business within Kings County, and whose
principal place of business is located in Brooklyn. Bogdan
Malinowski is the owner, founder, and president of the Corporate
Defendants.
The Defendants operate as building restoration and construction
companies.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Penn A. Dodson, Esq.
ANDERSONDODSON, P.C.
11 Broadway, Suite 615
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 961-7639
Facsimile: (646) 998-8051
E-mail: penn@andersondodson.com
MERCHANTS MUTUAL: MSP Recovery Seeks Reimbursement for Payments
---------------------------------------------------------------
MSP Recovery Claims, Series LLC, Plaintiff, v. Merchants Mutual
Insurance Company, Merchants National Insurance Company and
Merchants Preferred Insurance Company, Defendants, Case No.
18-cv-08030 (S.D. N.Y., September 4, 2018) seeks double damages
under the MSP Law for Defendant's failure to properly reimburse
conditional payments for enrollees' accident-related medical
expenses.
MSP claims reimbursement of medical expenses of Merchants Mutual
policyholders who were also Medicare beneficiaries.
Plaintiff is a Medicare Advantage Organization that provides
Medicare benefits to Medicare-eligible beneficiaries enrolled under
the Medicare Advantage program. These Medicare beneficiaries were
simultaneously covered by insurance policies issued by Defendants,
which made Defendants the primary payers for the medical bills,
services, and items paid by Plaintiffs and the Class Members. The
Plaintiffs paid for the medical items or treatment even though the
Defendants were responsible for paying those expenses under their
no-fault insurance policies and the Medicare Secondary Payer
provisions of Medicare, says the complaint. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard D. Meadow, Esq.
THE LANIER LAW FIRM, P.C.
6810 FM 1960 West
Houston, TX 77069
Telephone: (713) 659-5200
E-mail: richard.meadow@lanierlawfirm.com
- and -
Adam K. Pulaski, Esq.
PULASKI LAW FIRM, PLLC
2925 Richmond Ave, Ste 1725
Houston, TX 77098
Telephone: (713) 664-4555
E-mail: adam@pulaskilawfirm.com
MERCK & CO: Pearson Sues Over Zostavax Side Effects
---------------------------------------------------
Marian Pearson and Richard Pearson, Plaintiffs, v. Merck & Co.,
Inc., Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-011876
(W.D. La., September 10, 2018), requests compensatory damages,
together with interest, cost of suit, attorneys' fees, and all such
other relief resulting from negligence, breach of express and
implied warranty, negligent misrepresentation and unjust
enrichment.
Merck developed the Zostavax vaccine to be administered to patients
throughout the United States, including Louisiana. Marian Pearson
was inoculated with Zostavax vaccine for routine health maintenance
and for the prevention of shingles. The vaccine did not prevent
shingles, but rather gave Pearson a persistent strain of herpes
zoster and shortly after, she suffered from a severe right facial
nerve axonopathy and was diagnosed with Bell's Palsy.
Merck & Co., Inc. is pharmaceutical company existing under the laws
of the State of New Jersey with its principal place of business
located at 2000 Galloping Hill Road, Kenilworth, New Jersey. Merck
Sharp & Dohme Corp. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Merck.
Defendant [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Christopher L. Coffin, Esq.
Nicholas Rockforte, Esq.
PENDLEY, BAUDIN & COFFIN, LLP
1515 Poydras Street, Suite 1400
New Orleans, LA 70112
Tel: (504) 355-0086
Fax: (504) 523-0699
Email: ccoffin@pbclawfirm.com
nrockforte@pbclawfirm.com
- and -
Michael Goetz, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN
201 North Franklin Street, 7th Floor
Tampa, FL 33602
Tel: (813) 223-5505
Fax: (813) 222-4737
Email: MGoetz@ForThePeople.com
MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY: Faces Jackson Securities Suit in Arizona
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ronald L. Jackson, as Trustee Under Agreement Dated 01/05/2012 by
Ronald L. Jackson, Individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Microchip Technology Inc., Steven Sanghi, and
Ganesh Moorthy, Case No. 2:18-cv-02914-ESW (D. Ariz., September 14,
2018), is a federal securities class action seeking to pursue
remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Mr. Jackson contends that he purchased Microchip common stock in
reliance on the Defendants' materially false and misleading
statements and omissions of material facts, and on the integrity of
the market for Microchip common stock, at artificially inflated
prices during the Class Period, and was damaged when the truth
about Microchip was revealed to the market. He alleges that
Microchip had done inadequate due diligence and was unable to make
any statements concerning whether the $10.15 billion Microsemi
Corp. acquisition was "immediately accretive."
Microchip is a Delaware corporation with its principal executive
offices located in Chandler, Arizona. The Individual Defendants
are directors and officers of the Company.
Microchip is a provider of microcontroller, mixed-signal analog and
Flash-IP solutions.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew S. Friedman, Esq.
Francis J. Balint, Jr., Esq.
BONNETT FAIRBOURN FRIEDMAN & BALINT, P.C.
2325 East Camelback Road, Suite 300
Phoenix, AZ 85016
Telephone: (602) 274-1100
E-mail: afriedman@bffb.com
fbalint@bffb.com
- and -
Robert C. Finkel, Esq.
WOLF POPPER LLP
845 Third Avenue
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (212) 759-4600
E-mail: rfinkel@wolfpopper.com
NATIONWIDE RECOVERY: Debt Collection Violates FDCPA, McDonald Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
Amber McDonald, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Nationwide Recovery Systems, Ltd. and John Does 1-25,
Case No. 6:18-cv-00480 (E.D. Tex., September 16, 2018), alleges
that the Defendants' debt collection efforts attempted and directed
towards the Plaintiff violated various provisions of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.
Nationwide is a "debt collector" with an address in Tyler, Texas.
Nationwide is a company that uses the mail, telephone, and
facsimile and regularly engages in business the principal purpose
of which is to attempt to collect debts alleged to be due another.
The identities of the Doe Defendants are unknown to the
Plaintiff.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yaakov Saks, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
285 Passaic Street
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
E-mail: ysaks@steinsakslegal.com
PATENAUDE & FELIX: Voeks Disputes Collection Letter
---------------------------------------------------
Megan Voeks, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Patenaude & Felix, A.P.C., TD Bank USA,
N.A. and Target Corporation, Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-01393 (E.D.
Wis., September 7, 2018), seeks actual and statutory damages,
attorneys' fees, litigation expenses and costs of suit and such
other or further relief under the Fair Debt Collection Practices
Act and the Wisconsin Consumer Act.
Patenaude & Felix, A.P.C. is a collection agency with its principal
place of business located at 4545 Murray Canyon Road, Third Floor,
San Diego, CA 92123. TD Bank USA, N.A. is the issuer of Target
store-branded credit cards. On or about July 27, 2018, Patenaude
mailed a debt collection letter to Voeks in an attempt to collect
an alleged debt owed to TD Bank. Said letter listed both a "minimum
payment due" of $777.00, which is significantly greater than the
"minimum due" of $84.00 that was also listed, thus creating
confusion. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John D. Blythin, Esq.
Mark A. Eldridge, Esq.
Jesse Fruchter, Esq.
Ben J. Slatky, Esq.
ADEMI & O'REILLY, LLP
3620 East Layton Avenue
Cudahy, WI 53110
Tel: (414) 482-8000
Fax: (414) 482-8001
Email: jblythin@ademilaw.com
meldridge@ademilaw.com
jfruchter@ademilaw.com
bslatky@ademilaw.com
PEOPLE'S UNITED: Investors Cry Fraud Over Escrow Deal Breach
-------------------------------------------------------------
Antony Sutton, in his capacity as a Limited Partner of Jay Peak
Hotel Suites LP, Glyn Moser, in his capacity as a Limited Partner
of Jay Peak Hotel Suites Phase II LP, and Patrick Tawil, in his
capacity as a Limited Partner of Jay Peak Lodge and Townhouses LP
Plaintiffs v. People's United Financial, Inc., as Successor in
Interest to Chittenden Trust Company and People's United Bank,
Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-0146, (D. Vt., September 7, 2018), is a
class action on behalf of 836 individuals, who invested in the
development of the Jay Peak Ski Resort, alleging fraud under
federal security laws.
Plaintiffs and all 836 investors in the scheme were limited
partners of eight different Vermont limited partnerships involved
in the development of Jay Peak, and subsequently another Vermont
ski resort known as Burke Mountain. They claim that the bank
breached escrow agreements entered into with the Plaintiffs, and
all the individual investors, breached fiduciary duties arising
under those agreements by permitting the misappropriation of
escrowed funds held by the Defendants for uses other than those
mandated under the escrow agreements and subscription agreements
for the various limited partnerships. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua L. Simonds, Esq.
THE BURLINGTON LAW PRACTICE, PLLC
2 Church St. Suite 2G
Burlington VT 05401
Tel: (802) 651-5370
Email: jls@burlingtonlawpractice.com
- and -
Keith L. Miller, Esq.
Fifty-Eight Winter Street, 4th Floor
Boston, MA 02108
Tel: (617) 523-5803
Email: Klm4law@aol.com
PIO BOOT CAMP: Rutledge & Davis Sues Over Illegal Faxed Ads
-----------------------------------------------------------
Rutledge & Davis PLLC, Plaintiff, v. PIO Boot Camp, INC., an
Arizona corporation, Defendant, Case No. 18-cv-00191 (N.D. Miss.,
September 6, 2018), seeks damages and injunctive relief pursuant to
the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, as amended by the
Junk Fax Prevention Act of 2005.
Rutledge operates a legal practice providing various types of legal
care in Union County, Mississippi. PIO Boot Camp is a public
company that hosts seminars for police officers to learn about
intensive media relations and social media training.
PIO allegedly utilizes "fax blasting" activities to generate sales
leads for its seminars. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
L.N. Chandler Rogers, Esq.
ROGERS LAW GROUP
201 E. Bankhead Street
New Albany, MS 38652
Tel: (662) 538-5990
Fax: (662) 538-5997
Email: chandler@rogerslawgroup.com
- and -
Winston B. Collier, Esq.
THE COLLIER FIRM
2090 Old Taylor Road
Oxford, MS 38655
Tel: (870) 347-2100
Fax: (870) 347-1164
Email: winston@thecollierfirm.com
- and -
Gregory M. Zarzaur, Esq.
ZARZAUR MUJUMDAR & DEBROSSE-TRIAL LAWYERS
2332 2nd Avenue North
Birmingham, AL 35203
Tel: (205) 983-7985
Fax: (888) 505-0523
Email: Gregory@zarzaur.com
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY: Abrahamov Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Portfolio Recovery
Associates, LLC. The case is styled as Daniel Abrahamov on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v.
Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:18-cv-05291 (E.D. N.Y., Sept. 20, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act.
Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, also known as Anchor
Receivables Management, manages past-due accounts. It serves
customers through account representatives. The company was
incorporated in 1996 and is based in Norfolk, Virginia. Portfolio
Recovery Associates, LLC operates as a subsidiary of PRA Group,
Inc.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel C Cohen, Esq.
Cohen & Mizrahi LLP
300 Cadman Plaza West
12th Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Phone: (929) 575-4175
Fax: (929) 575-4195
Email: dan@cml.legal
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY: Kraiem Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Portfolio Recovery
Associates, LLC. The case is styled as Galit Kraiem on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Portfolio
Recovery Associates, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-05306 (E.D.
N.Y., Sept. 20, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act.
Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, also known as Anchor
Receivables Management, manages past-due accounts. It serves
customers through account representatives. The company was
incorporated in 1996 and is based in Norfolk, Virginia. Portfolio
Recovery Associates, LLC operates as a subsidiary of PRA Group,
Inc.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel C Cohen, Esq.
Cohen & Mizrahi LLP
300 Cadman Plaza West
12th Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Phone: (929) 575-4175
Fax: (929) 575-4195
Email: dan@cml.legal
PRIVATE HEALTHCARE: Rowan Family Sues Over Illegally Faxed Ads
--------------------------------------------------------------
Rowan Family Dentistry, a Mississippi corporation, Plaintiffs, v.
Private Healthcare Systems (PHCS Multiplan), Inc., a New York
corporation, Defendant, Case No. 18-cv-03100, (N.D. Miss.,
September 5, 2018) seeks damages and injunctive relief pursuant to
the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991.
PHCS is a care management company that manages a network of
healthcare providers and hospitals all across the nation. It
allegedly sent an unsolicited faxed ad to Rowan's phone in an
effort to promote its services. Rowan operates a dentistry practice
providing clinical and surgical oral and dental care in New Albany,
Mississippi. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
L.N. Chandler Rogers, Esq.
ROGERS LAW GROUP
201 E. Bankhead Street
New Albany, MS 38652
Tel: (662) 538-5990
Fax: (662) 538-5997
Email: chandler@rogerslawgroup.com
- and -
Winston B. Collier, Esq.
THE COLLIER FIRM
2090 Old Taylor Road
Oxford, MS 38655
Tel: (870) 347-2100
Fax: (870) 347-1164
Email: winston@thecollierfirm.com
- and -
Gregory M. Zarzaur, Esq.
ZARZAUR MUJUMDAR & DEBROSSE-TRIAL LAWYERS
2332 2nd Avenue North
Birmingham, AL 35203
Tel: (205) 983-7985
Fax: (888) 505-0523
Email: Gregory@zarzaur.com
RENTGROW INC: McIntyre Files Suit Over Erroneous Report
-------------------------------------------------------
Patricia McIntyre, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Rentgrow, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 18-cv-
03793, (E.D. Pa., September 5, 2018) seeks relief for violations of
the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
RentGrow does business as "Yardi Resident Screening." On or about
July 27, 2017, Plaintiff applied to rent an apartment at Alden
Park, in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
According to the complaint, an Alden Park representative obtained a
Yardi Resident Screening report that included eleven inaccurate and
out-of-date items of eviction information purportedly pertaining to
McIntyre. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James A. Francis, Esq.
John Soumilas, Esq.
Lauren KW Brennan, Esq.
FRANCIS & MAILMAN, P.C.
Land Title Building, Suite 1902
100 South Broad Street
Philadelphia, PA 19110
Tel: (215) 735-8600
Fax: (215) 940-8000
Email: jfrancis@consumerlawfirm.com
jsoumilas@consumerlawfirm.com
lbrennan@consumerlawfirm.com
RFI ENTERPRISES: Peters Labor Suit Remanded to State Court
----------------------------------------------------------
Judge Beth Labson Freeman of the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California, San Jose Division, granted Peters'
motion to remand the case, BRIAN PETERS, Plaintiff, v. RFI
ENTERPRISES, INC., Defendant, Case No. 18-cv-01187-BLF (N.D. Cal.),
to the Santa Clara County Superior Court.
On Jan. 12, 2018, Peters, a former employee of Defendant RFI, filed
a Class Action Complaint in Superior Court of the State of
California, Santa Clara County. In his complaint, he alleges that
RFI violated several California laws by (a) failing to correctly
calculate the regular rate of pay for employees, leading to
incorrect overtime payments; (b) failing to provide proper payroll
records; and (c) engaging in unfair business practices.
Peters was a non-exempt employee at RFI's location in San Jose,
California. Throughout Peters' employment, RFI failed to pay him
and certain other non-exempt employees overtime wages at the
correct rate of pay by failing to include certain non-discretionary
wages in the calculation of the regular rate of pay, which is used
in turn to calculate overtime wages. Moreover, because of this
miscalculation, employees' itemized wage statements were
inaccurate. These violations, he claims, also constituted unfair
and unlawful business practices.
Peters filed a state court complaint asserting three causes of
action for violations of the following laws: (1) Labor Code
Sections 510, 558, and 1194, for failure to correctly calculate the
regular rate of pay, and in turn, overtime wages; (2) Labor Code
Section 226(a), for failure to provide proper payroll records; and
(3) California Business and Professions Code Section 17200, et
seq., for unlawful and unfair business practices.
On Feb. 20, 2018, RFI filed its answer, in which it asserts a
general denial and seven affirmative defenses, two of which are
relevant in the instant motion. In its third affirmative defense,
RFI alleges that Peters' claims are preempted by Section 301 of the
Federal Labor Management Relations Act ("LMRA"). In its Notice of
Removal, it alleges that, during the relevant time period, Peters
and RFI's other non-exempt employees were subject to a valid
collective bargaining agreement ("CBA"). Peters does not mention
this CBA in his complaint. In its second affirmative defense, RFI
alleges that the CBA exempted Peters under Labor Code Section 514
from California's overtime requirements.
On Feb. 23, 2018, RFI removed the case to the Court based on
federal question jurisdiction, claiming that the Plaintiff's claims
under California law are preempted under Section 301 of the LMRA].
Peters now moves to remand, arguing that there is no federal
question jurisdiction.
Having carefully considered the submitted papers, Judge Freeman
granted Peters' motion and remanded the action to state court.
The Judge agrees with the overwhelming majority of courts to decide
the issue and finds that RFI's invocation of the Section 514
exemption as an affirmative defense does not change the legal
character of Peters' state-law claim. She thus holds that RFI
fails to satisfy the first Burnside step. RFI also fails to
demonstrate that LMRA Section 301 preempts Peters' state-law claim
under Section 510, such that the claim cannot serve as the basis
for federal question jurisdiction.
For the foregoing reasons, Judge Freeman concludes that RFI has not
met its burden to establish that removal is proper. The Clerk will
remand the case to Santa Clara County Superior Court. All other
matters are terminated and vacated, and the Clerk will close the
file.
A full-text copy of the Court's Aug. 15, 2018 Order is available at
https://is.gd/Bb0eKk from Leagle.com.
Brian Peters, Plaintiff, represented by Kristen Michelle Agnew --
kagnew@diversitylaw.com -- Diversity Law Group, APC, Kwanporn
Tulyathan -- ktulyathan@diversitylaw.com -- Diversity Law Group,
Larry W. Lee -- lwlee@diversitylaw.com -- Diversity Law Group,
P.C., Nicholas Rosenthal -- nrosenthal@diversitylaw.com --
Diversity Law Group & William Lucas Marder --
bill@polarislawgroup.com -- Polaris Law Group, LLP.
RFI Enterprises, Inc., Defendant, represented by Kurt Edward Wilson
-- kwilson@smwb.com -- Sweeney Mason Wilson & Bosomworth A
Professional Corporation, Lynn R. Fiorentino --
lynn.fiorentino@arentfox.com -- Arent Fox LLP, Paul R. Lynd --
paul.lynd@arentfox.com -- Arent Fox LLP, Robert K. Carrol --
robert.carrol@arentfox.com -- Arent Fox LLP & Roger Mark Mason --
robert.carrol@arentfox.com -- Sweeney Mason Wilson & Bosomworth.
ROCKWELL MEDICAL: Spock Files Suit Over Share Price Drop
--------------------------------------------------------
Robert Spock, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, vs. Rockwell Medical, Inc., Robert L. Chioini
and Thomas E. Klema, Defendants (E.D. N.Y., September 4, 2018),
seeks to recover damages caused by violations of federal securities
laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Rockwell operates as an integrated biopharmaceutical company
targeting endstage renal and chronic kidney diseases. Its lead
branded drug is Triferic, an iron maintenance therapy that replaces
the iron lost by patients during hemodialysis treatment.
According to the complaint, the Defendants failed to disclose that
Triferic treatments were not subject to financial incentives for
patients; that there was a material weakness in Rockwell's internal
controls over financial reporting; and its internal controls over
financial reporting were ineffective. On this news, Rockwell's
stock price fell $0.85 per share, or over 16%, over two consecutive
trading days to close at $4.41 per share on June 28, 2018, damaging
investors, including the Plaintiff. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq.
J. Alexander Hood II, Esq.
POMERANTZ LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (212) 661-1100
Facsimile: (212) 661-8665
Email: jalieberman@pomlaw.com
ahood@pomlaw.com
- and -
Patrick V. Dahlstrom, Esq.
POMERANTZ LLP
10 South La Salle Street, Suite 3505
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: (312) 377-1181
Facsimile: (312) 377-1184
Email: pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com
SANCHEZ OIL: Munoz Suit Seeks to Recover OT Pay Under FLSA
----------------------------------------------------------
GUADALUPE MUNOZ; ROSA ISELA REYNA f/k/a ROSA REYNA GARCIA; STEVE
MARSHALL; GEORGE GREGGO, Individually and On Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated v. SANCHEZ OIL & GAS CORPORATION, Case No.
5:18-cv-00963 (W.D. Tex., September 14, 2018), seeks to recover
overtime compensation and all other available remedies under the
Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.
Sanchez Oil & Gas Corporation is a foreign corporation with its
principal office in Laredo, Texas. Sanchez Oil is an oil and gas
company with operations in Texas and across the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Josh Borsellino, Esq.
BORSELLINO, P.C.
1020 Macon St., Suite 15
Fort Worth, TX 76102
Telephone: (817) 908-9861
Facsimile: (817) 394-2412
E-mail: josh@dfwcounsel.com
SANDBOX TRANSPORTATION: Dotson Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------
Craig Dotson Individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, v. Sandbox Transportation, LLC, Defendants,
Case No. 18-cv-03228, (S.D. Tex., September 11, 2018) seeks to
recover compensation, overtime wages, liquidated damages,
attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act
of 1938, Ohio's Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act, Ohio Prompt Pay
Act and the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act.
SandBox is a trucking company headquartered in Houston, Texas and
provides local sand, rock, gravel, and asphalt hauling and delivery
services to the oil and gas industry throughout the United States.
Dotson worked for SandBox as a Fork Lift/Equipment Operator in West
Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania from approximately September 2016
until April 2017. He claims he did not receive overtime
compensation at the required rate of time-and-one-half for all
hours worked over forty each workweek. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Clif Alexander, Esq.
Lauren E. Braddy, Esq.
Carter T. Hastings, Esq.
Austin W. Anderson, Esq.
Alan Clifton Gordon, Esq,
George Schimmel, Esq.
ANDERSON2X, PLLC
819 N. Upper Broadway
Corpus Christi, TX 78401
Tel: (361) 452-1279
Fax: (361) 452-1284
Email: clif@a2xlaw.com
lauren@a2xlaw.com
carter@a2xlaw.com
austin@a2xlaw.com
geordie@a2xlaw.com
SARA BRONFMAN-IGTET: Sued Over Fake Academic Program
----------------------------------------------------
Isabella Martinez and Gabriella Leal, individually and on behalf of
others persons similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Sara
Bronfman-Igtet, Defendant, Case No. 517921/2018, (N.Y. Sup. Ct.,
September 4, 2018), seeks to recover fees and tuition paid for
Executive Success Program and NXIVM classes, including monetary and
punitive damages and equitable and injunctive relief, restitution,
costs and expenses, including attorneys' and expert fees, interest
and any additional relief pursuant to New York General Business
Law.
Defendant sold seminar and mentorship programs under a multi-level
marketing scheme. However, there was no consistent program or
syllabus, no end, no graduation, no certification and no
credentials, says the Plaintiff. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Omar W. Rosales, Esq.
THE ROSALES LAW FIRM, LLC
PO BOX 6429
Austin, TX 78762-6429
Tel: (512) 520-4919
Fax: (512) 309-5360
Website: www.owrosales.com
Email: omar@owrosales.com
SILVERSTEIN PROPERTIES: Face Sullivan ADA Suit in S.D.N.Y.
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Silverstein
Properties, Inc. The case is styled as Phillip Sullivan, Jr. on
behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v.
Silverstein Properties, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-08562
(S.D. N.Y., Sept. 19, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act of 1990.
Silverstein Properties, Inc. is a family held, full-service real
estate development, investment and management firm based in New
York City. Founded in 1957 by Chairman Larry Silverstein, the
company specializes in developing, acquiring, and managing office,
residential, hotel, retail, and mixed-use properties.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
C.K. Lee, Esq.
Lee Litigation Group, PLLC
30 East 39th Street
2nd Floor
New York, NY 10016
Phone: (212) 465-1188
Fax: (212) 465-1181
Email: cklee@leelitigation.com
SIOUX CITY POLICE: Hunter Files Civil Rights Action in South Dakota
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Sioux City Police
Department et al. The case is styled as Michael Howard Hunter,
Plaintiff v. Sioux City Police Department, City of South Sioux City
Police Department, City of Watertown, City of Rogers Police, City
of Rogers Chief of Police, City of Fort Smith Police Department,
City Police of Sioux Falls, City Police of Belle Fourche, Every
Police Officer unnamed similarly situated, Dick Johnson,
Defendants, Case No. 4:18-cv-04119-LLP (D. S.D. Sept. 20, 2018).
The cause of action is stated as Civil Action for Deprivation of
Rights.
The Sioux City Police Department serves and protects the citizens
of Sioux City, Iowa. It is located at 601 Douglas St. Sioux City,
IA 51101 and can be contacted at; phone: 712-279-6440; fax:
712-279-6148.[BN]
The Plaintiff appears pro se.
SKECHERS USA: Workers' Fund Sues Over Share Price Drop
------------------------------------------------------
Laborers Local 235 Benefit Funds, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Skechers USA, Inc., Robert
Greenberg, John Vandemore and David Weinberg, Defendants, Case No.
18-cv-08039, (S.D. N.Y., September 4, 2018) seeks to pursue
remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Skechers designs and markets branded footwear for men, women, and
children. In recent years, Skechers has experienced rapid sales
growth, particularly in the Company's international markets driven
largely by unsustainable increases in its selling, general and
administrative expenses despite lacking the operational
infrastructure to meet the demand for its products in China and
other international markets, says the complaint. Skechers was
relying on expensive, third-party operational solutions to drive
its sales growth, it adds.
On this news, Skechers stock dropped $6.98, or 20.1%, from a
closing price of $33.25 per share on July 19, 2018, to $26.27 per
share on April 20, 2018, wiping out an additional $947 million in
market cap.
Laborers Local 235 Benefit Funds purchased Skechers common stock
and lost suhbstantially. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Steven B. Singer, Esq.
Rhonda Cavagnaro, Esq.
SAXENA WHITE PA
10 Bank Street, 8th Floor
White Plains, NY 10606
Tel: (914) 437-8551
Fax: (888) 631-3611
Email: ssinger@saxenawhite.com
rcavagnaro@saxenawhite.com
- and -
Joseph E. White, III, Esq.
Kenneth M. Rehns, Esq.
SAXENA WHITE PA
150 East Palmetto Park Road, Suite 600
Boca Raton, FL 33432
Tel: (561) 394-3399
Fax: (561) 394-3382
Email: jwhite@saxenawhite.com
krehns@saxenawhite.com
SLEEP MANAGEMENT: Fails to Pay OT Under FLSA & AMWA, Prince Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL PRINCE, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated v. SLEEP MANAGEMENT, L.L.C., d/b/a VIEMED, Case No.
4:18-cv-00673-BRW (E.D. Ark., September 14, 2018), alleges that the
Defendant violates the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Arkansas
Minimum Wage Act by, among other things, failing to pay the
Plaintiff and other salaried Clinical Liaison employees lawful
overtime compensation for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per
week.
Sleep Management, L.L.C., doing business as VieMed, is a foreign
limited liability company, registered and licensed to do business
in the state of Arkansas.
The Company is a provider of in-home medical services and
equipment, operating in more than 20 states, including Arkansas,
and has its principal place of business in Lafayette,
Louisiana.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Christopher Burks, Esq.
Josh Sanford, Esq.
SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC
One Financial Center
650 South Shackleford, Suite 411
Little Rock, AR 72211
Telephone: (501) 221-0088
Facsimile: (888) 787-2040
E-mail: chris@sanfordlawfirm.com
josh@sanfordlawfirm.com
SOUTH FLORIDA CONTROLS: Serra Action to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Monika Serra, and others similarly-situated, Plaintiff, v. South
Florida Controls Inc., a Florida corporation and Hector Hernandez,
Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-23624 (S.D. Fla., September 5, 2018),
requests compensatory and liquidated damages and reasonable
attorney's fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act,
for unpaid overtime, liquidated damages, prejudgment interest and
any and all other relief.
South Florida Controls -- www.sfc-mia.com -- is engaged in the
business of managing, designing and servicing energy management
projects. Defendants employed Plaintiff as a project coordinator
from approximately July 2017 through August of 2018 as a non-exempt
employee. Plaintiff routinely worked overtime but was not paid for
hours worked in excess of forty hours per week, says the complaint.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Christopher F. Zacarias, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF CHRISTOPHER F. ZACARIAS, P.A.
5757 Blue Lagoon Drive, Suite 230
Miami, FL 33126
Tel: (305) 403-2000
Fax: (305) 459-3964
Email: czacarias@zacariaslaw.com
pleadings@zacariaslaw.com
rosendo@zacariaslaw.com
STARWOOD HOTELS: Santana Seeks Damages for Unpaid Wages
-------------------------------------------------------
Guillermo Santana, and other similarly situated individuals,
Plaintiff(s), v. Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc.,
Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, LLC, Marriott International,
Inc., Luxury Elite Concepts LLC and Jillian Jacobson, Defendants,
Case No. 18-cv-23613, (S.D. Fla., September 5, 2018), seeks to
recover money damages for unpaid minimum and overtime wages
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Starwood operates as The St. Regis Bal Harbour Resort. Marriott
International, Inc. and Luxury Elite Concepts operate hotels in
Miami-Dade, Florida. They jointly employed Santana as an
hourly-paid cook.
According to the Plaintiff, the Defendants did not properly
compensate him for hours that he worked in excess of 40 per week.
Luxury shaved hours off his pay thus rendering his pay less than
the mandated minimum wage, he adds. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
R. Martin Saenz, Esq.
SAENZ & ANDERSON, PLLC
20900 NE 30th Avenue, Ste. 800
Aventura, FL 33180
Telephone: (305) 503-5131
Facsimile: (888) 270-5549
Email: msaenz@saenzanderson.com
SUPER INSURANCE: Illegally Sends Telemarketing Texts, Perez Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
Manuel Perez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Super Insurance Group, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability
Company, Case No. 1:18-cv-23800-FAM (S.D. Fla., September 14,
2018), accuses the Defendant of violating the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act by engaging in unsolicited telemarketing, harming
thousands of consumers in the process.
Super Insurance Group, LLC, is a Florida limited liability company
whose principal office is located in Coral Gables, Florida. The
Company is an insurance agency.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A.
14 NE 1st Avenue, Suite 400
Miami, FL 33132
Telephone: (305) 479-2299
E-mail: ashamis@shamisgentile.com
- and -
Scott Edelsberg, Esq.
EDELSBERG LAW, PA
19495 Biscayne Blvd., #607
Aventura, FL 33180
Telephone: (305) 975-3320
E-mail: scott@edelsberglaw.com
TECHNOLOGY INSURANCE: MSP Recovery Seeks Reimbursement for Payments
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MSP Recovery Claims, Series LLC, Plaintiff, v. Technology Insurance
Company, Inc. and Amtrust Financial Services, Inc., Defendants,
Case No. 18-cv-08036, (S.D. N.Y., September 4, 2018) seeks double
damages under the MSP Law for Defendant's failure to properly
reimburse conditional payments for enrollees' accident-related
medical expenses.
MSP claims reimbursement of medical expenses of Technology
Insurance and Amtrust policyholders who were also Medicare
beneficiaries.
Plaintiff is a Medicare Advantage Organization that provides
Medicare benefits to Medicare-eligible beneficiaries enrolled under
the Medicare Advantage program. These Medicare beneficiaries were
simultaneously covered by insurance policies issued by Defendants,
which made Defendants the primary payers for the medical bills,
services, and items paid by Plaintiffs and the Class Members. The
Plaintiffs paid for the medical items or treatment even though the
Defendants were responsible for paying those expenses under their
no-fault insurance policies and the Medicare Secondary Payer
provisions of Medicare, says the complaint. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard D. Meadow, Esq.
THE LANIER LAW FIRM, P.C.
6810 FM 1960 West
Houston, TX 77069
Telephone: (713) 659-5200
E-mail: richard.meadow@lanierlawfirm.com
- and -
Adam K. Pulaski, Esq.
PULASKI LAW FIRM, PLLC
2925 Richmond Ave, Ste 1725
Houston, TX 77098
Telephone: (713) 664-4555
E-mail: adam@pulaskilawfirm.com
TIGER EYE PIZZA: Wright Says Vehicle Reimbursements Not Enough
--------------------------------------------------------------
David Wright, on behalf of himself and those similarly situated,
Plaintiff, v. Tiger Eye Pizza LLC, an Arizona corporation,
Defendant, Case No. 18-cv-04127 (W.D. Ark., September 7, 2018),
seeks to recover minimum wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act
and the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act.
Defendants operate Domino's pizza restaurants where Wright worked
as a delivery driver. Tiger Eye Pizza allegedly failed to
adequately reimburse delivery drivers for their delivery-related
and other work-related expenses, thereby failing to pay delivery
drivers the legally mandated minimum wage wages for all hours
worked. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John D. Coulter, Esq.
MCMATH WOODS P.A.
711 West Third Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
Telephone: (501) 396-5400
Facsimile: (501) 374-5118
E-mail: john@mcmathlaw.com
- and -
Andrew Biller, Esq.
Andrew Kimble, Esq.
MARKOVITS, STOCK & DEMARCO, LLC
3825 Edwards Road, Suite 650
Cincinnati, OH 45209
Telephone: (513) 651-3700
Facsimile: (513) 665-0219
Email: abiller@msdlegal.com
akimble@msdlegal.com
TITAN INDUSTRIES: Schlag Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay
------------------------------------------------------
Sean H. Schlag, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Titan Industries, Inc., Defendant, Case No.
18-cv-03184, (S.D. Tex., September 7, 2018) seeks to recover
overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorney's fees,
litigation costs, costs of court, prejudgment and post-judgment
interest under the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act of
1938.
Titan Industries specializes in fabricating systems that inject
additives into fuel supplies at fuel loading terminals. Schlag was
employed as an installation supervisor from October 2016 through
August 16, 2018. Defendants allegedly failed to pay him overtime
premiums for hours worked in excess of forty hours per week. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglas B. Welmaker, Esq.
WELMAKER LAW PLLC
Austin, TX 78715
Phone: (512) 799-2048
Fax: (512) 253-2969
Email: doug@welmakerlaw.com
TRAN VUONG CORP: Does Not Pay Overtime Wages, He Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------
ZHIWEI HE, on behalf of himself and Others similarly situated v.
TRAN VUONG CORPORATION d/b/a CANTON HOUSE, and CAM B. VUONG, Case
No. 1:18-cv-04338-CAP (N.D. Ga., September 14, 2018), accuses the
Defendants of violating the Fair Labor Standards Act by engaging in
a pattern and practice of failing to pay its current and former
employees, including the Plaintiff, overtime compensation for all
hours worked over 40 each workweek.
Tran Vuong Corporation is a domestic business corporation organized
under the laws of the state of Georgia with a principal address in
Chamblee, Georgia. The Individual Defendant is the owner and
operator of the Corporate Defendant.
The Defendants operate a Chinese restaurant known as Canton House
in Chamblee. Canton House is a casual Chinese restaurant
specializing in dim sum and traditional Cantonese cuisine.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Donald W. Benson, Esq.
HALL BOOTH SMITH, P.C.
191 Peachtree Street, N.E., Suite 2900
Atlanta, GA 30303
Telephone: (404) 954-5020
E-mail: dbenson@hallboothsmith.com
TRANSUNION LLC: McIntyre Sues Over Erroneous Credit Report
----------------------------------------------------------
Patricia McIntyre, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Transunion, LLC, and Transunion Resident
Screening Solutions, Inc. (TURSS), Defendant, Case No. 18-cv-03865,
(E.D. Pa., September 10, 2018) seeks relief for violations of the
Fair Credit Reporting Act.
On or about August 18, 2016, Plaintiff applied to rent an apartment
at Duffield House, an apartment complex in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania. A Duffield House representative obtained a tenant
screening report from TURSS that McIntyre claims as inaccurate and
containing out-of-date entries of eviction information. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James A. Francis, Esq.
John Soumilas, Esq.
Lauren KW Brennan, Esq.
FRANCIS & MAILMAN, P.C.
Land Title Building, Suite 1902
100 South Broad Street
Philadelphia, PA 19110
Tel: (215) 735-8600
Fax: (215) 940-8000
Email: jfrancis@consumerlawfirm.com
jsoumilas@consumerlawfirm.com
lbrennan@consumerlawfirm.com
- and -
Leonard A. Bennett, Esq.
CONSUMER LITIGATION ASSOCIATES, P.C.
763 J. Clyde Morris Blvd., Ste. 1-A
Newport News, VA 23601
Telephone: (757) 930-3660
Facsimile: (757) 930-3662
Email: lenbennett@clalegal.com
TRIBUNE MEDIA CO: Masseys Jewelers Hits Air-time Price Rigging
--------------------------------------------------------------
Masseys Jewelers, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Tribune Media Company and
Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-01576
(C.D. Cal., September 4, 2018), seeks damages, injunctive relief
and other relief for violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act.
Defendants are media companies who are accused by the Plaintiff of
conspiring to fix, raise, stabilize, and maintain prices for
commercials to be aired on broadcast television stations throughout
the United States by sharing competitively sensitive information
through their advertising sales teams.
Masseys Jewelers is a jewelry store based in Sandy, Utah. It
purchased TV ad time from KUTV, a local TV station owned by
Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Patrick J. Coughlin, Esq.
David W. Mitchell, Esq.
Alexandra S. Bernay, Esq.
Carmen A. Medici, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
San Diego, CA 92101-8498
Telephone: (619) 231-1058
Fax: (619) 231-7423
E-mail: patc@rgrdlaw.com
davidm@rgrdlaw.com
xanb@rgrdlaw.com
cmedici@rgrdlaw.com
- and -
BRIAN J. ROBBINS, Esq.
GEORGE C. AGUILAR, Esq.
ROBBINS ARROYO LLP
600 B Street, Suite 1900
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 525-3990
Fax: (619) 525-3991
E-mail: brobbins@robbinsarroyo.com
gaguilar@robbinsarroyo.com
- and -
STEPHEN G. GRYGIEL, Esq.
WILLIAM N. SINCLAIR, Esq.
SILVERMAN THOMPSON SLUTKIN WHITE
201 N. Charles Street, Suite 2600
Baltimore, MD 21201
Telephone: (410) 385-2225
Fax: (410) 547-2432
E-mail: sgrygiel@mdattorney.com
bsinclair@mdattorney.com
- and -
James E. Barz, Esq.
Frank Richter, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
200 South Wacker Drive, 31st Floor
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 674-4674
Fax: (312) 674-4676 (fax)
E-mail: jbarz@rgrdlaw.com
frichter@rgrdlaw.com
TRIBUNE MEDIA: Arbitrage Fund Hits Share Price Drop
----------------------------------------------------
The Arbitrage Event-Driven Fund, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Tribune Media Company,
Peter Kern, Chandler Bigelow and Edward P. Lazarus, Defendants,
Case No. 18-cv-06175 (N.D. Ill., September 10, 2018), seeks damages
for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.
Sinclair is a media company with approximately 193 stations in 80
markets. It planned to acquire Tribune but needed to divest some
stations in accordance with anti-trust laws. However, Sinclair did
not show any signs of complying with the regulatory requirements
necessary to complete the merger, says the complaint. Their stance
caused Tribune stock to close down $6.44 per share (over 16%),
costing investors more than $564 million in value, the complaint
adds.
Tribune is a media company with a diverse portfolio of television
and digital properties with 42 local television stations in 33
markets.
The Arbitrage Event-Driven Fund is a multi-strategy fund which
invests in the equity and debt instruments of companies involved in
corporate events. Plaintiff and its registered investment manager,
Water Island Capital LLC, is headquartered in New York, New York.
[BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew J. Entwistle, Esq.
ENTWISTLE & CAPPUCCI LLP
299 Park Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Telephone: (212) 894-7200
Facsimile: (212) 894-7272
Email: aentwistle@entwistle-law.com
- and -
Michael H. Moirano, Esq.
Claire G. Kenny, Esq.
Stephen A. Gorman, Esq.
MOIRANO GORMAN KENNY, LLC
135 S. LaSalle St., Suite 2200
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: (312) 614-1260
Email: mmoirano@mgklaw.com
TWENTY-THREE-ONE-NOUGHT-W: Recarte Files FLSA Suit in S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against
Twenty-Three-One-Nought-W, LLC. The case is styled as Jose Recarte
individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff
v. Twenty-Three-One-Nought-W, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:18-cv-08534 (S.D. N.Y., Sept. 19, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Labor Standards Act for
denial of overtime compensation.
Twenty-Three-One-Nought-W LLC is in the apartments business.
Operating for 10 or more years, the company is located at 2310
Walton Ave, Bronx, NY 10468.[BN]
The Plaintiff appears pro se.
UBER TECH: Diva Limousine Sues Over Anti-competitive Practices
--------------------------------------------------------------
Diva Limousine, Ltd., individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Uber Technologies, Inc., Rasier,
LLC, Rasier-CA, LLC, Uber USA, LLC, and UATC, LLC, Defendants, Case
No. 17-cv-05546 (N.D. Cal., September 10, 2018) seeks damages
resulting from the Defendants' anticompetitive conduct under
California's Unfair Practices Act and the Unfair Competition Law
including reasonable attorney's fees and costs including injunctive
relief.
Uber Technologies, Inc. is a Delaware corporation headquartered at
1455 Market Street, San Francisco, California, 94103. Plaintiffs
are Uber drivers. Uber allegedly misclassifies its drivers as
contractors, not employees, thus denying them basic employee
benefits including minimum wages, overtime pay, workers'
compensation benefits to include unemployment insurance, income tax
withholding, the ability to participate in Uber's retirement
plan(s), meal and rest breaks.
The Plaintiff is a provider of livery services and accuses Uber of
unfair competition brought about by misclassifying its drivers as
independent contractors and thus can price their rides extremely
low. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. Geibelson, Esq.
Aaron M. Sheanin, Esq.
Tai S. Milder, Esq.
ROBINS KAPLAN LLC
2440 W. El Camino Real, Suite 100
Mountain View, CA 94040
Telephone: (650) 784-4040
Facsimile: (650) 784-4041
Email: MGeibelson@RobinsKaplan.com
ASheanin@RobinsKaplan.com
TMilder@RobinsKaplan.com
- and -
Ashley Keller, Esq.
Warren Postman, Esq.
Seth Meyer, Esq.
Tom Kayes, Esq.
150 N. Riverside Plaza, Suite 4270
Chicago, IL 60606
Tel: (312) 741-5220
Email: ack@kellerlenkner.com
wdp@kellerlenkner.com
sam@kellerlenkner.com
tk@kellerlenkner.com
UNI NYC: Lopez Files FLSA Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against UNI NYC LLC et al.
The case is styled as Carlos Alberto Ramirez Lopez, Jorje Bolivar
Rea Rivera, Ismael Ramirez Lopez, Segundo Rea individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. UNI NYC LLC
d/b/a Tre Otto, jointly and severally, Lauren Y. Cangiano jointly
and severally, Louis S. Cangiano, Jr., jointly and severally,
Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-08544 (S.D. N.Y., Sept. 19, 2018).
The Plaintiffs filed the case under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Tre Otto is a restaurant that serves authentic Italian food and is
located at 1410 Madison Avenue, NY 10029.[BN]
The Plaintiffs appear pro se.
VACATION EXPERTS: Illegally Sends Phone Messages, Lee Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
DEBBIE LEE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. VACATION EXPERTS INTERNATIONAL, LLC, a Tennessee
Limited Liability Company, Case No. 2:18-cv-14381 (S.D. Fla.,
September 14, 2018), arises from the Defendant's alleged
transmission of prerecorded messages to the cellular telephones of
the Plaintiff and others, promoting its services and goods, in
violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
Vacation Experts is a Tennessee limited liability company whose
principal office is located in Sevierville, Tennessee. The
Defendant directs, markets, and provides its business activities
throughout the state of Florida.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A.
14 NE 1st Avenue, Suite 400
Miami, FL 33132
Telephone: (305) 479-2299
E-mail: ashamis@shamisgentile.com
- and -
Scott Edelsberg, Esq.
EDELSBERG LAW, PA
19495 Biscayne Blvd #607
Aventura, FL 33180
Telephone: (305) 975-3320
E-mail: scott@edelsberglaw.com
VICTORIA CONSULTING: Siguencia Files FLSA Suit in E.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Victoria Consulting &
Development LLC. The case is styled as Jorge Siguencia, Omar
Rodriguez, De Jesus Torres, Edison Ludizaca, Braulio "Milton"
Penaranda on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs v. Victoria Consulting & Development LLC d/b/a Victoria
Consulting & Development, Alfa Renovation Corp., Art Sheet Metal
Corp, Lombardy Contracting Corp., Dariusz Knapik, Defendants, Case
No. 1:18-cv-05296 (E.D. N.Y., Sept. 20, 2018).
The Plaintiffs filed the case under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Victoria Consulting And Development LLC is a privately held company
in Brooklyn, NY and is a Single Location business. It is located at
176 Franklin Street, Brooklyn, NY 11222.
Art's Sheet Metal Manufacturing Inc. manufactures metal products
for the construction industry, such as roof top flashings, vents,
shingles, tie plates, and hangers. The company is based in Morgan
Hill, California.[BN]
The Plaintiffs appear pro se.
VISIONPRO CONNECTIONS: Prelim. Conf. in Fearon Suit Set for Oct. 22
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A preliminary conference will be held on Oct. 22, 2018, in the case
styled as Fearon, Rohan and individually and on behalf of all other
persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. VisionPRO Connections,
Inc., VisionPRO Corp., VisionPRO Networks, and any other affiliated
entities that employed plaintiff and member, Defendants, Case No.
612066/2018 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Nassau Cty., Sept. 19, 2018).
VisionPRO, a subsidiary of Vision Information Technologies, Inc.,
is a leading provider of IT staffing and talent management
solutions to companies worldwide. For over 20 years, VisionPRO has
specialized in delivering IT talent to Fortune 500, mid-size
organizations and large government agencies on a contract-to-hire,
contract and permanent placement basis. Through more than 20
offices across the United States, VisionPRO helps clients hire and
optimize highly-skilled and specialized IT talent to build an
effective workforce strategy that drives business performance and
innovation. VisionPRO supports other markets with IT consultants in
global markets through its sister company, VisionIT in Canada,
Mexico and Brazil.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
VIRGINIA & AMBINDER, LLP
40 Broad Street,7th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Phone: (212) 943-9080
The Defendant is represented by:
JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
58 S. Service Road, STE 410
Melville, NY 11747
Phone: (631) 247-4660
WORLD-WIDE HOLDINGS: Fischler Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against World-Wide Holdings
Corporation. The case is styled as Brian Fischler individually and
on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v.
World-Wide Holdings Corporation, Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-08635
(S.D. N.Y., Sept. 20, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act of 1990.
World-Wide Holdings Corporation was founded in 1987. The company's
line of business includes subdividing real property into lots. It
is located at 950 3rd Ave Fl 18, New York, NY 10022.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglas Brian Lipsky, Esq.
Lipsky Lowe LLP
630 Third Avenue
Fifth Floor
New York, NY 10017
Phone: (212) 392-4772
Fax: (212) 444-1030
Email: doug@lipskylowe.com
YUQI'S CUISINE INC: Restaurant Staff Seeks Unpaid OT Wages
----------------------------------------------------------
Sutasinee Sirimungkla and Punsak Keawmanee, individually and on
behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Yuqi's Cuisine
Inc., Cui Xia Ji, Mark Tamas, Vicky Tamas and Danny Doe,
Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-08186, (S.D. N.Y., September 7, 2018),
seeks to recover unpaid minimum, overtime and spread-of-hours wages
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and New York Labor
Law, including applicable liquidated damages, interest, attorneys'
fees and costs.
Defendants own, operate, or control a Thai restaurant, located at
813 9th Ave, New York, NY 10019 under the name "Yuqi's Cuisine"
where Sirimungkla and Keawmanee were employed as server and cook,
respectively. They claim to have worked in excess of 40 hours per
week, without appropriate overtime compensation. Defendants failed
to maintain accurate recordkeeping of the hours worked, failed to
pay them for any hours worked, either at the straight rate of pay
or for any additional overtime premium and the required "spread of
hours" pay for any day in which he/she had to work over 10 hours a
day. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael Faillace, Esq.
MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
New York, NY 10165
Tel: (212) 317-1200
Email: Faillace@employmentcompliance.com
*********
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., Washington, D.C., USA. Rousel Elaine T.
Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche A. Castillon, Julie Anne L.
Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.
Copyright 2018. 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 $775 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 A. Chapman at 215-945-7000.
*** End of Transmission ***