/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/231013.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Friday, October 13, 2023, Vol. 25, No. 206
Headlines
3M COMPANY: Blackmon Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals
3M COMPANY: DeBoer Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina
3M COMPANY: Ekster Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
3M COMPANY: Froman Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Gray Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
3M COMPANY: Harris Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Manati City Sues Over Contaminated Environment
3M COMPANY: McInerney Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals
ABLETO INC: Sessa Files TCPA Suit in M.D. Florida
ACCUSOURCE HR: Ward Sues Over Negligent Dissemination of Reports
ADVANCE AMERICA: Strickland Files Suit in M.D. Florida
ALLSTATE INSURANCE: Riemenapp Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Wisconsin
AMAZING SMILES: Erkan Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
AMERICAN MULTI-CINEMA: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Cooper Says
ARAM P. CAZAZIAN: Durantas Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
ARAMARK UNIFORM: King Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation
ARAPAHOE COUNTY, CO: Court Dismisses Suit Over Agency's Misconduct
AVALANCHE DIRECT: Tarr Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
AVENUE J FLORIST: Durantas Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
B&H HEALTHCARE SERVICES: Boakye Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
BAYER AG: Roundup Herbicide Causes Cancer, Hernandez Suit Claims
BEECHMONT BREWING: Cataline Sues Over Unpaid Minimum Wages
BENCHMARK 237: Hof Sues Over Schematic & Discriminatory Practices
BREW DR. KOMBUCHA: Schneiderman Suit Removed to C.D. California
BROOKLYN TEA SELLER: Durantas Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
CAL CARTAGE: Hernandez Suit Removed to C.D. California
CAMBER ENERGY: Class Action Suit Over Diluted Shares Dismissed
CANADA: Faces Suit Over Disability Payments in Military Veterans
CARESOURCE: Stevens Sues Over Failure to Safeguard PII & PHI
CVS HEALTH: Faces Osterhaus Suit Over Improper Pharmacies' Fees
D.R. HORTON: Homeowners Get $20M Deal in Negligence Class Suit
DC FOUNDATIONS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Belitz Alleges
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE: Villalta Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Neubauer Files FCRA Suit in D. Oregon
EXPERIAN INFORMATION: Lelinger Suit Removed to S.D. Florida
F21 OPCO LLC: Robinson Sues Over Cyberattack and Data Breach
FIRST UNITED: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Bike Suit Alleges
FIRSTENERGY CORP: Faces Class Suit Over Illegal Debt Collection
FRANCHISE WORLD: Abdulhadi Files ADA Suit in C.D. California
GENWORTH FINANCIAL: Manar Files Suit in E.D. Virginia
GREAT AMERICAN: Schuchmann Files TCPA Suit in M.D. Pennsylvania
HEARTLAND RESOLUTIONS: Taylor Files FDCPA Suit in C.D. California
I-HEALTH INC: Warren Sues Over False and Misleading Marketing
JLT RISK: Settlement Approval in Suit Over Fiduciary Duties Sought
LACTALIS AMERICAN: Court Dismisses Suit Over Mislabeled Feta Cheese
LENDINGTREE LLC: Agrees to Settle Data Breach Suit for $875,000
MONTANA: Overcharges Residential Property Taxes, Class Suit Says
MP2 ENTERPRISES: Fails to Pay Proper wages, Brandi-Vanmeter Claims
NEW YORK: Bentkowski Brings New Appeal to N.Y. Appellate Division
PEOPLES BANK: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Barefoot Alleges
PROGRESS SOFTWARE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Brida Alleges
REPUBLIC OF SUDAN: Appeals Dismissal Bid Ruling in O'Neill Suit
S.R.Y. FOOD: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Cabrera Suit Alleges
SAUDI ARABIA: Sudan Files 2nd Cir. Appeal in O'Neill Suit
SELENE FINANCE: Argona Suit Removed to S.D. Florida
SIEMENS INDUSTRY: Court Grants Transfer of FLSA Suit to C.D. Cal.
SMG FOOD AND BEVERAGE: Ordono Suit Removed to N.D. California
STANLEY STEAMER: Espinal Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
STREMICKS HERITAGE: Johnson Suit Removed to C.D. California
TESLA INC: Mata Files Suit in N.D. California
TIDAL FOODS: Bullock Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
TORONTO, ON: Court Certifies Class Suit Over Brokerage Commissions
TRI COUNTIES BANK: Wilson Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
UNITED HEALTHCARE: Abramowitz Files Suit in D. Minnesota
UNITED STATES: Faces Class Suit Over Legal Use of Medical Marijuana
UNIVERSITY HEALTH: Suit Removed to E.D. Tennessee
US BANK NATIONAL: Frazier Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
VERIZON CONNECT: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Cansler Alleges
WHALECO INC: Faces Class Suit Over Alleged Data Breach
WHIRLPOOL CORP: Faces Class Suit Over Defective Refrigerators
WISCONSIN: Court Denies Class Status in Suit Over Legal Defenders
Asbestos Litigation
ASBESTOS UPDATE: H.B. Fuller Defends Personal Injury Lawsuits
*********
3M COMPANY: Blackmon Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals
----------------------------------------------------------
Larry Blackmon, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No.
2:23-cv-04374-RMG (D.S.C., Aug. 30, 2023), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with
thyroid cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Phone: 631-600-0000
Facsimile: 631-543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
3M COMPANY: DeBoer Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina
--------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Dick DeBoer, et al., and others similarly
situated v. 3M COMPANY; AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS, INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S., INC., ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC; CHEMGUARD,
INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E. I. DU PONT
DE NEMOURS & CO.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC.; FIRE-DEX, LLC; GLOBE
MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.;
JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; LION GROUP, INC.; MINE
SAFETY APPLIANCE COMPANY LLC; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE
PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; STEDFAST USA, INC.; TEN
CATE PROTECTIVE FABRICS USA D/B/A SOUTHERN MILLS INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY LLC.; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, L.P.; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES,
INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-01059 was transferred from the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of Alabama, to the U.S. District
Court for the District of South Carolina on Sept. 27, 2023.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:23-cv-04822-RMG to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Personal Injury.
3M Company is an American multinational conglomerate operating in
the fields of industry, worker safety, healthcare, and consumer
goods.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
The Defendants are represented by:
Harlan Irby Prater, IV, Esq.
M. Christian King, Esq.
Wesley B Gilchrist, Esq.
William Larkin Radney, IV, Esq.
LIGHTFOOT FRANKLIN AND WHITE LLC
400 20th Street North
Birmingham, AL 35203
Phone: (205) 581-0700
Fax: (205) 581-0799
Email: hprater@lightfootlaw.com
cking@lightfootlaw.com
wgilchrist@lightfootlaw.com
lradney@lightfootlaw.com
3M COMPANY: Ekster Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
----------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Ekster, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.); Case No. 2:23-cv-04808-RMG (D.S.C., Sept. 26,
2023), is brought for damages for personal injury resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory
and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a state police officer and was diagnosed with bladder cancer as
a result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James E. Murrill, Jr., Esq.
Keith Jackson, Esq.
RILEY & JACKSON, P.C.
3530 Independence Dr.
Birmingham, AL 35209
Phone: 205-879-5000
Facsimile: 205-879-5901
3M COMPANY: Froman Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Froman, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), WILLFIRE HC
LLC, d/b/a WILLLIAMS FIRE & HAZARD CONTROL, Case No.
2:23-cv-04407-RMG (D.S.C., Aug. 31, 2023), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with
prostate cancer and bladder cancer as a result of exposure to
Defendants' AFFF products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Scott M. Hendler, Esq.
HENDLER FLORES LAW, PLLC
901 S. MoPac Expressway
Bldg. 1, Ste 300
Austin, TX 78746
Phone: (512) 439-3202
Fax: (512) 439-3201
Email: shendler@hendlerlaw.com
3M COMPANY: Gray Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dwight Gray, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No.
2:23-cv-04834-RMG (D.S.C., Sept. 27, 2023), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with
prostate cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Phone: 631-600-0000
Facsimile: 631-543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
3M COMPANY: Harris Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Albert Harris, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No.
2:23-cv-04342-RMG (D.S.C., Aug. 29, 2023), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with
prostate cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Phone: 631-600-0000
Facsimile: 631-543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
3M COMPANY: Manati City Sues Over Contaminated Environment
----------------------------------------------------------
City Of Manati, Puerto Rico, and other similarly situated v. 3M
COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC
CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD,
INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD;
CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT
DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU
PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE
PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORP., INC.
(f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.); Case No. 2:23-cv-04839-RMG (D.S.C.,
Sept. 27, 2023), is brought against the Defendants alleging
theories of trespass, nuisance, negligence, wantonness, fraudulent
concealment, breach of warranty, and strict liability for
environmental and economic injuries, contamination and unlawful
incursion onto the Plaintiff's land, surface and subsurface soil,
sediment, natural resources, municipal and real property caused by
releases of fluorinated Class B firefighting foams manufactured
with synthetic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances or chemicals
(collectively and hereafter referred to as "PFAS")
In this complaint, the term ("PFAS") refers to a family of
synthetic man-made chemicals and surfactants including but not
limited to: Perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA"),
Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid ("PFOS"), Perfluorohexanoic acid
("PFHxA"), Perfluoropentanoic acid ("PFPA"), Perfluoroheptanoic
acid ("PFHpA"), Pentafluorobenzoic acid ("PFBA"),
Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid ("PFBS"), Perfluorononanoic acid
("PFNA"), Perfluorodecacanoic acid ("PFDA") and Perfluorohexane
Sulfonic Acid ("PFHS"). In this complaint, the term Aqueous
Film-Forming Foam ("AFFF") refers to any fluorinated firefighting
foams that contains PFOS and/or PFOA (including any of their salt,
ionic or acid forms and their precursors or degradation products)
manufactured, sold or distributed by the Defendants for civilian,
military and training applications worldwide.
PFOS and PFOA are synthetic fluorinated compounds that are
particularly useful for controlling and extinguishing aviation,
marine, fuel, and other Class B fires because fluorine atoms have
extremely persistent and stable physio-chemical properties. PFOS
and PFOA are soluble in water, not easily biodegradable, and
persistent in the environment. Both are known to be harmful to
human health. When AFFF containing PFOS or PFOA is released into
the environment; both compounds, their precursors and degradation
products, can migrate into soil and groundwater. It has been shown
that the bioconcentration and bioaccumulation of perfluorinated
acids is directly related to fluorination.
PFOA and PFOS are extremely toxic, not easily biodegradable,
persistent in the environment and pose a significant risk to animal
and human health. Fire Departments have provided fire protection
and response in Manati and surrounding areas for decades. Fire
departments have used AFFF containing PFOS and PFOA in fire
suppression and training activities for many years. During these
activities, AFFF was used as directed by the manufacturer, which
allowed PFOS and PFOA to enter the environment. When sprayed onto
outdoor surfaces as intended, the compounds migrated through the
soil and into the groundwater, thereby contaminating the water
pumped into Plaintiff's water supply, as well as Plaintiff's
municipal land.
Potential release sites including fire training areas ("FTA's") and
non-fire training areas where AFFF has been regularly used, stored,
transported, and directly or indirectly discharged into the
environment. In this case, the Defendants have distributed,
manufactured and sold fluorinated AFFF foams to municipal fire
authorities, including but not limited to the "Estación de
Bomberos de Manati", a Puerto Rico fire station and helipad,
located on Puerto Rico Highway 670 in Manati.
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge that it contained
highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which would expose end users
of the product to the risks associated with PFAS. Further,
defendant designed, marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed,
released, trained users, produced instructional materials,
promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used underlying
chemicals and/or products added to AFFF which contained PFAS for
use in firefighting.
The Defendants failed to warn individuals, communities,
municipalities, or states of the serious environmental, human, and
animal toxicity concerns linked to the use and exposure to
fluorinated AFFF foams. Because the Defendants knowingly placed
defective and dangerously toxic fluorinated AFFF foams into the
stream of commerce they are strictly liable to the Plaintiff for
causing the release of toxic PFAS compounds onto the City's
municipal lands and its surface and subsurface soil.
The Defendants sold, manufactured, and distributed AFFF containing
fluorinated surfactants touting the superior firefighting
performance for decades and deliberately chose not to warn end
users or purchasers of the potential environmental or human
toxicity concerns linked to fluorinated compounds. Because the
Defendants negligently caused the release of toxic PFAS compounds
onto the City's municipal lands and its surface and subsurface soil
they are all jointly and severally liable, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff City of Manati is a Puerto Rican municipal
corporation, who brings this action on behalf of itself and in its
sovereign capacity, as a trustee, for the benefit of its citizens
and natural resources.
3M designed, marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed,
released, trained users, produced instructional materials,
promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used AFFF containing
PFAS that are used in firefighting training and response
exercises.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
- and -
Juan Saavedra-Castro, Esq.
August Matties, Esq.
WEISBROD MATTEIS & COPLEY PLLC
290 Ave. Jesus Y. Pinero, Suite 1201
San Juan, Puerto Rico 00918
3M COMPANY: McInerney Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals
-----------------------------------------------------------
Dennis McInerney, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No.
2:23-cv-04341-RMG (D.S.C., Aug. 29, 2023), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with
skin cancer and ulcerative colitis as a result of exposure to
Defendants' AFFF products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Phone: 631-600-0000
Facsimile: 631-543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
ABLETO INC: Sessa Files TCPA Suit in M.D. Florida
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against AbleTo, Inc. The case
is styled as Michael Sessa, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated v. AbleTo, Inc., Case No. 8:23-cv-02219 (W.D.
Wis., Sept. 29, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.
AbleTo -- https://www.ableto.com/ -- is a leading provider of
virtual behavioral health care.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ryan Lee McBride, Esq.
KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP APC
301 East Bethany Home Road Suite C-195
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Phone: (800) 400-6808
Fax: (800) 520-5523
Email: ryan@kazlg.com
ACCUSOURCE HR: Ward Sues Over Negligent Dissemination of Reports
----------------------------------------------------------------
Reshia Ward, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. ACCUSOURCE HR, INC., Case No. 3:23-cv-01176-OAW (D.
Conn., Sept. 6, 2023), is brought to recover damages for violations
of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA") alleging that Accusource
has negligently and recklessly disseminated consumer reports
concerning Plaintiff's and countless others' backgrounds that
wrongfully reported criminal records that had been "erased" or
expunged pursuant to Connecticut law.
Prior to August 24, 2023, Plaintiff applied for an employment
position with Kelly Education. As part of her application,
Plaintiff consented that Kelly Education could obtain a background
consumer reporting regarding herself. Kelly Education then
contracted with Defendant to procure this report. On August 24,
2023, Plaintiff received an email from Kelly Education with the
heading "Re: Notice of Pending Adverse Action." The email indicated
that Kelly Education was considering resolving her candidacy
negatively based on the report provided by Defendant. The email
indicated that this was specifically due to the criminal
information provided by Defendant.
When Plaintiff review the report provided by Defendant, she was
frustrated to see that Defendant was reporting multiple criminal
convictions out of Windham, Connecticut on her report. First, case
number CR090140502S, which involved two misdemeanour convictions,
for assault in the third degree and criminal mischief in the third
degree, with a final disposition date of February 27, 2012. Second,
case number CR120148507S, which also involved two misdemeanour
convictions, for disorderly conduct and interference with an
officer/resisting, with a final disposition date of March 27,
2014.
The Plaintiff was upset and frustrated because to her
understanding, under the Act, these misdemeanour offenses were well
over 7 years old, and as such, as of January 1, 2023, they had been
erased by operation of law. Indeed, when Plaintiff went on the
State of Connecticut Judicial Branch's website to search up her
case records by case number, no such records appeared.
Unfortunately, despite the very purpose of the Act, on August 31,
2023, Plaintiff received notice from Kelly Education that it would
be unable to offer her employment due to the results of Defendant's
consumer background check. The Defendant has reported disparaging
conviction information that has been erased by operation of law
under the Act for countless other individuals.
The Defendant fails to have such reasonable procedures, as it fails
to prevent erased/sealed/expunged records from appearing on
consumer's reports, despite the FCRA prescribing that it do so. As
a direct result of Defendant's erroneous reporting, Plaintiff and
the Class members have been damaged, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a natural person and resident of the State of
Connecticut.
Accusource HR, Inc. is a "consumer reporting agency."[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ari H. Marcus, Esq.
Joseph Kanee, Esq.
MARCUS & ZELMAN, LLC
701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1550
Miami, FL 33131
Phone: (786) 369-1122
Facsimile: (732) 298-6256
Email: ari@marcuszelman.com
joseph@marcuszelman.com
ADVANCE AMERICA: Strickland Files Suit in M.D. Florida
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Advance America, Cash
Advance Centers of Florida, LLC. The case is styled as Francine
Strickland, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Advance America, Cash Advance Centers of Florida, LLC
doing business as: Advance America, Case No. 6:23-cv-01672-PGB-RMN
(M.D. Fla., Aug. 31, 2023).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract for Contract
Dispute.
Advance America -- https://www.advanceamerica.net/ -- offers easy
online cash advances, fast cash loans and more.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rachel Nicole Edelsberg, Esq.
DAPEER LAW, P.A.
20900 NE 30th Ave., Ste. 417
Aventura, FL 33180
Phone: (305) 610-5223
Email: rachel@dapeer.com
ALLSTATE INSURANCE: Riemenapp Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Wisconsin
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Allstate Insurance
Company, et al. The case is styled as Alex Riemenapp, individually,
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Allstate
Insurance Company, John Does 1-10, Case No. 3:23-cv-00670 (W.D.
Wis., Sept. 29, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.
The Allstate Corporation -- https://www.allstate.com/ -- is an
American insurance company, headquartered in Glenview, Illinois
since 2022.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Marwan Rocco Daher, Esq.
Mohammed O. Badwan, Esq.
SULAIMAN LAW GROUP, LTD.
2500 S. Highland Avenue, Suite 200
Lombard, IL 60148
Phone: (630) 575-8181 x109
Fax: (630) 575-8188
Email: mdaher@sulaimanlaw.com
mbadwan@sulaimanlaw.com
AMAZING SMILES: Erkan Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Amazing Smiles
Orthodontics, P.C. The case is styled as Nihal Erkan, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated v. Amazing Smiles
Orthodontics, P.C., Case No. 1:23-cv-07298 (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 29,
2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Amazing Smiles Orthodontics -- https://amazingsmiles.com/ -- has
been providing quality orthodontic care for patients throughout
Queens, Brooklyn, and Long Island for more than thirty years,.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mars Khaimov, Esq.
14749 71st Ave.
Flushing, NY 11367
Phone: (917) 915-7415
Email: mars@khaimovlaw.com
AMERICAN MULTI-CINEMA: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Cooper Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
NICHOLAS COOPER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. AMERICAN MULTI-CINEMA, INC.; and AMC
ENTERTAINMENT HOLDINGS, INC. d/b/a AMC THEATRES, Defendants, Case
No. 2:23-cv-02434-JWB-BGS (D. Kan., Sept. 26, 2023) is a class
action against the Defendant for its failure to secure and
safeguard the personally identifiable information of the Plaintiff
and the Class when an unauthorized party accessed one of MOVEit's
Transfer servers.
The Plaintiffs allege in the complaint that as a result of the
Defendant's failure to provide reasonable and adequate data
security, the Plaintiff's and the Class Members' unencrypted,
non-redacted PII has been exposed to unauthorized third parties.
The Plaintiff and the Class are now at much higher risk of identity
theft and cybercrimes of all kinds, especially considering the
highly sensitive PII stolen here and the fact that the compromised
PII is already being sold on the dark web. This risk constitutes a
concrete injury suffered by the Plaintiff and the Class as they no
longer have control over their PII, which PII is now in the hands
of third-party cybercriminals, says the suit.
AMERICAN MULTI-CINEMA, INC. provides entertainment services. The
Company owns and operates movie theatres. American Multi-Cinema
serves customers in the United States. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Maureen M. Brady, Esq.
Lucy McShane KS, Esq.
MCSHANE & BRADY, LLC
1656 Washington Street, Suite 120
Kansas City, MO 64108
Telephone: (816) 888-8010
Facsimile: (816) 332-6295
E-mail: mbrady@mcshanebradylaw.com
lmcshane@mcshanebradylaw.com
ARAM P. CAZAZIAN: Durantas Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Aram P. Cazazian,
P.C. The case is styled as Hakan Durantas, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated v. Aram P. Cazazian, P.C., Case No.
1:23-cv-07300-VMS (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 29, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Dr. Aram P. Cazazian - DDS is a dentist in Bayside, New York
providing general, family, & cosmetic dental services in
Bakersfield.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mars Khaimov, Esq.
14749 71st Ave.
Flushing, NY 11367
Phone: (917) 915-7415
Email: mars@khaimovlaw.com
ARAMARK UNIFORM: King Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation
------------------------------------------------------------
Michael King, Christopher Serico, Tanner Kuljian, Leah Woodley, and
Mary Schrage, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated
v. ARAMARK UNIFORM & CAREER APPAREL, LLC, Case No. CACE-23-018128
(Fla., 17th Judicial Cir. Ct., Broward Cty., Sept. 7, 2023), is
brought seeking to recover allegedly unpaid overtime compensation
for The Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees of Defendant.
The Plaintiffs allege that they worked for Defendant and for
Defendant's benefit in excess of 40 hours per workweek during new
hire sales training. The Plaintiffs allege that they and the
Putative Collective Members performed work during overtime hours
without receiving overtime premiums during their new hire sales
training period. The Plaintiffs allege that Defendant did not pay
The Plaintiffs and the Putative Collective Members for all hours
worked, including all overtime hours worked, during their new hire
training period. The Plaintiffs allege that Defendant violated the
FLSA by classifying The Plaintiffs and the Putative Collective
Members as overtime-exempt during new hire sales training and
failing to pay them overtime wages as required by law, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiffs were classified as overtime-exempt during new hire
sales training as Account Executives, First Aid Sales Specialists
and Facility Sales Specialists.
AUS is a corporation which does business in Florida including in
Broward County.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregg I. Shavitz, Esq.
SHAVITZ LAW GROUP, P.A.
951 Yamato Road
Boca Raton, FL 33431
Phone: (561) 447-8888
Fax: (561) 447-8831
Email: gshavitz@shavitzlaw.com
ARAPAHOE COUNTY, CO: Court Dismisses Suit Over Agency's Misconduct
------------------------------------------------------------------
Max Levy of Sentinel reports that a federal judge on September 26,
2023 threw out a class-action case filed by Aurora City Council
member Danielle Jurinsky against Arapahoe County's Department of
Human Services, which Jurinsky has accused of agency-wide
misconduct.
Jurinsky filed the case on behalf of herself and other families
after Robin Niceta -- a former DHS caseworker and the ex-girlfriend
of Aurora's ex-police chief, Vanessa Wilson -- anonymously and
falsely reported that Jurinsky had sexually molested her own son.
Niceta made the report shortly after Jurinsky criticized Wilson on
a talk radio show. Investigators later concluded that Niceta's
accusation was unsubstantiated.
Niceta has since been charged with retaliation against an elected
official and making a false report of child abuse as a mandatory
reporter. She is expected to stand trial on those charges in
November.
The trial date was postponed earlier this year after Niceta and her
mother were indicted for allegedly trying to dupe prosecutors in
that case into thinking that Niceta was incapacitated by cancer,
fabricating medical records and creating an online presence for a
fake cancer clinic.
Jurinsky has argued that Niceta's misconduct reflects deeper
problems within the Arapahoe County Department of Human Services.
Last fall, she and others who say their families were targeted by
the agency filed a class-action lawsuit against the department;
Niceta; her supervisor, Michelle Dossey; and the Arapahoe County
Board of County Commissioners.
In his written decision dismissing the case, Judge Philip Brimmer
wrote that Jurinsky did not plausibly accuse Niceta of acting
"under the color of state law" when Niceta made the anonymous
report. He pointed out that the county hotline used by Niceta was
open to members of the public.
"Although Ms. Jurinsky's complaint alleges that Ms. Niceta 'knew
exactly the false information she had to provide' to trigger an
investigation, it does not allege that Ms. Niceta took any action
beyond what any other citizen could have done by anonymously
contacting ACDHS," Brimmer wrote.
Jurinsky also accused Niceta of using her position to try to get
Jurinsky's case assigned to herself and tamper with or try to
tamper with related documents. Brimmer cited a 10th Circuit Court
of Appeals decision which found that officials can't be found to
have acted under the color of law when their actions "clearly fall
within 'the gambit of their personal pursuits.'"
"Interfering with an investigation and altering, destroying, or
fabricating evidence are plainly not part of a caseworker's
official duties. Instead, these actions fall within the gambit of
Ms. Niceta's personal pursuits," Brimmer wrote.
While Jurinsky argued that she was deprived of her right to due
process by alleged investigative failures on the part of Arapahoe
County, Brimmer replied that Jurinsky's complaint did not specify
whether she was formally investigated nor separated from her son.
Although the case was dismissed with prejudice, following the
ruling, Jurinsky said she and the other plaintiffs plan to refile
the case against the county, excluding Niceta as a defendant, in
the near future.
"It could be this week. It's already written out," Jurinsky said.
"The fight is not over."
In a news release, Carrie Warren-Gully, chair of the Arapahoe
County Board of County Commissioners, described Brimmer's decision
as vindicating for the county.
"September 26, 2023's ruling confirms what we've known all along --
our human services employees are committed to the highest standards
of protection for children and vulnerable adults," she said.
"These steadfast employees have been wrongly vilified, placing
undue public scrutiny against them due to a groundless lawsuit and
the actions of one bad actor. We're grateful to be able to put this
behind us and continue serving the needs of our residents."
The news release also mentioned the findings of a review
commissioned by the Colorado Department of Human Services that was
completed earlier this year and cleared the county of wrongdoing.
Jurinsky previously called the audit a "whitewash." [GN]
AVALANCHE DIRECT: Tarr Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Avalanche Direct,
LLC. The case is styled as Ellen Elizabeth Tarr, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated v. Avalanche Direct, LLC,
Case No. 1:23-cv-08612 (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 29, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Avalanche Direct, LLC -- https://www.avalancheoutdoorsupply.com/ --
is a destination for outdoor apparel and related products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mars Khaimov, Esq.
10826 64th Avenue, Ste. 2nd Floor
Forest Hills, NY 11375
Phone: (917) 915-7415
Email: mars@khaimovlaw.com
AVENUE J FLORIST: Durantas Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Avenue J Florist,
LLC. The case is styled as Hakan Durantas, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated v. Avenue J Florist, LLC, Case No.
1:23-cv-07302 (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 29, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
The Avenue J Florist -- https://avenuejfloral.com/ -- offers fresh
flower delivery Brooklyn.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mars Khaimov, Esq.
14749 71st Ave.
Flushing, NY 11367
Phone: (917) 915-7415
Email: mars@khaimovlaw.com
B&H HEALTHCARE SERVICES: Boakye Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against B&H Healthcare
Services, Inc. The case is styled as Mathew Boakye, individually
and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated v. B&H
Healthcare Services, Inc., Case No. 159744/2023 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., New
York Cty., Sept. 29, 2023).
B & H Healthcare Services, Inc., doing business as Nursing
Personnel, provides healthcare services. The Company offers skilled
nursing, administering medications, personal and wound care,
infusion and physical therapy, medication assistance, case
management, laundry and light cleaning, meal preparation, and
respite services.[BN]
BAYER AG: Roundup Herbicide Causes Cancer, Hernandez Suit Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
JONAS PEREZ-HERNANDEZ; ISABEL PAZHERNANDEZ; MOISES PEREZ-PAZ;
ALLISON PEREZ-PAZ; and ABIGAIL PEREZPAZ, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. BAYER
AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT; BAYER CORPORATION; and MONSANTO COMPANY, a
Delaware corporation, Defendants, Case No. 3:23-cv-04946 (N.D.
Cal., Sept. 26, 2023) seeks to obtain compensatory damagess,
medical monitoring, and other valuable relief on behalf of the
Plaintiffs and the hundreds of thousands agricultural workers,
landscapers, and home gardeners who used Roundup, unaware this
exposure increased their risk of contracting Non-Hodgkins Lymphoma
(NHL).
According to the complaint, the Defendants knew that Roundup is
carcinogenic and associated with an increased risk of developing
NHL. Yet the Defendants took active steps to conceal and failed to
adequately inform and warn the Plaintiffs and the Class of the
serious risks associated with the use of and exposure to
glyphosate-based formulations and Roundup. In the pursuit of
massive profit and at the expense of public health, the Defendants
have promoted and funded falsified data; attacked legitimate
studies revealing the dangers of Roundup; mounted a campaign of
misinformation to delegitimize the work of scientists attempting to
reveal the dangers of Roundup; and made and continue to make
representations suggesting that Roundup was, and is, safer than
ordinary household items, says the suit.
These statements and misrepresentations have been made with the
intent of inducing the purchase and use of Roundup for the
Defendants' pecuniary gain, and with disregard for and reckless
indifference to the safety of those exposed to Roundup, the suit
alleges.
BAYER AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT produces and markets healthcare and
agricultural products. The Company manufactures products that
include aspirin, antibiotics, anti-infectives, cardiovascular,
oncology, central nervous system drugs, over-the-counter
medications, diagnostics, and animal health products, as well as
crop protection products, plastics, and polyurethanes. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph R. Saveri, Esq.
Christopher K. L. Young, Esq.
Itak K. Moradi, Esq.
JOSEPH SAVERI LAW FIRM, LLP
601 California Street, Suite 1000
San Francisco, CA 94108
Telephone: (415) 500-6800
Facsimile: (415) 395-9940
Email: jsaveri@saverilawfirm.com
cyoung@saverilawfirm.com
imoradi@saverilawfirm.com
- and -
Robert L. Lieff, Esq.
P.O. Box A
Rutherford, CA 94573
Telephone: (415) 250-4800
Email: rlieff@lieff.com
BEECHMONT BREWING: Cataline Sues Over Unpaid Minimum Wages
----------------------------------------------------------
Heather Cataline, on behalf of herself and others similarly
situated v. BEECHMONT BREWING, LLC D/B/A WANDERING MONSTERS BREWING
COMPANY, Case No. 1:23-cv-00621-JPH (S.D. Ohio, Sept. 29, 2023), is
brought against the Defendant seeking minimum wage and other
compensation due to Defendant's violations of the Fair Labor
Standards Act ("FLSA"), Art. II, Section 34a of the Ohio
Constitution ("Section 34a"), and the Ohio Prompt Pay Act ("OPPA"),
(Section 34a and the OPPA will be referred to collectively as "the
Ohio Acts").
The Plaintiff primarily performed tip producing job duties,
including serving beverages and various food items to patrons. She
was paid a base wage of $5.06 per hour. The Plaintiff and other
members of the Putative Class were hourly, non-exempt tipped
employees entitled to the protections of the FLSA, attendant
regulations, including the payment of minimum wage and retention of
all tips earned during their employment. However, Defendant failed
to comply with the FLSA and Ohio Acts resulting in the failure to
pay minimum wages and other compensation in several respects.
Defendant applied or caused to be applied substantially the same
employment policies, practices, and procedures to its tipped
employees, including policies, practices, and procedures relating
to the payment of wages, tips, and timekeeping, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant as a bartender from July 1,
2023 until August 14, 2023.
The Defendant is in the business of manufacturing beer and
providing beer, alcoholic beverages, and food items to
patrons.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel I. Bryant, Esq.
BRYANT LEGAL, LLC
1550 Old Henderson Road, Suite 126
Columbus, OH 43220
Phone: (614) 704-0546
Facsimile: (614) 573-9826
Email: dbryant@bryantlegalllc.com
- and -
Matthew B. Bryant, Esq.
Esther E. Bryant, Esq.
BRYANT LEGAL, LLC
3450 W Central Ave., Suite 370
Toledo, OH 43606
Phone: (419) 824-4439
Facsimile: (419) 932-6719
Email: Mbryant@bryantlegalllc.com
Ebryant@bryantlegalllc.com
BENCHMARK 237: Hof Sues Over Schematic & Discriminatory Practices
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Hof and Scott Mcpherson, individually, and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. BENCHMARK 237, LLC, BENCHMARK REAL
ESTATE TRUST, SLLC, CANVAS INVESTMENT PARTNERS, LLC, CANVAS
PROPERTY GROUP, LLC, JULIET TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, and FARADAY FUTURE
INTELLIGENT ELECTRIC, INC., Case No. 654311/2023 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.,
New York Cty., Sept. 4, 2023), is brought involving the underserved
communities of New York City's affordable housing, civil rights and
the law of corporations as a result of the Defendants harming Class
Members through a variety of schematic practices having a
discriminatory effect on the Plaintiffs and Class Members.
The Defendants represented themselves as incorporated, and mixed
business operations and assets contrary to elementary notions of
prudent business judgment. Instead of being open and honest with
others, Defendants used a false brand image of themselves to market
themselves in a way to induce others intentionally.
In addition to making false statements, Defendants omitted
material, contrary information to others. The Defendants have been
unjustly enriched at the expense of others. The Defendants'
violated New York's laws of corporations, and notions of fair
housing. The Defendants breached implied warranties with vulnerable
populations.
Tenants signed lease agreements with an unincorporated person or
group of people masquerading as incorporated, contractable parties
in good standing to transact business in New York. However, that
was a false image that advanced Defendants' scheme. Unincorporated
people cannot be a collective or joint party to anything. They
cannot sue or be sued as a single, joined entity. Tenants do not
enjoy a full breadth of procedural due process rights related to a
human right of housing. Tenants do not enjoy a full breadth of the
internationally-recognized human right of economic opportunity.
The Plaintiffs seek on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated, compensatory relief, injunctive relief, interim
relief, punitive relief, and the reimbursement of attorneys fees
and costs, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff has leased or used a residential dwelling unit in an
apartment building owned by Benchmark 237, LLC.
Benchmark 237, LLC is Delaware-domiciled, limited liability
company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph A. Hof, Esq.
HOF LAW, LLC
99 Washington Ave., Suite 700
Albany, NY 12260
Phone: (917) 740-3631
Email: joseph.a.hof@outlook.com
BREW DR. KOMBUCHA: Schneiderman Suit Removed to C.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Alicia Schneiderman, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. Brew Dr. Kombucha, LLC also
known as: Brew Dr. Kombucha, Case No. 23STCV11280 was removed from
the Superior Court of CA for the County of Los Angeles, to the U.S.
District Court for the Central District of California on Sept. 29,
2023.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:23-cv-08226-MEMF-BFM
to the proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.
Brew Dr. Kombucha -- https://www.brewdrkombucha.com/ -- is an
American company which makes a fermented tea beverage consisting of
brewed organic whole tea leaves, dried herbs, roots, and
fruits.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ryan Lee McBride, Esq.
KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP APC
301 East Bethany Home Road Suite C-195
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Phone: (800) 400-6808
Fax: (800) 520-5523
Email: ryan@kazlg.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Jasmine Wei-Ming Wetherell, Esq.
PERKINS COIE LLP
1888 Century Park East Suite 1700
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Phone: (310) 788-9900
Fax: (310) 788-3399
Email: jwetherell@perkinscoie.com
- and -
Charles C. Sipos, Esq.
PERKINS COIE LLP
1201 Third Avenue Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101
Phone: (206) 359-8000
Fax: (206) 359-9000
Email: csipos@perkinscoie.com
BROOKLYN TEA SELLER: Durantas Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Brooklyn Tea Seller,
Inc. The case is styled as Hakan Durantas, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated v. Brooklyn Tea Seller, Inc., Case
No. 1:23-cv-07304-LDH-RER (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 29, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Brooklyn Tea -- https://brooklyntea.com/ -- is a tearoom, tea shop,
online retailer and wholesaler of organic loose leaf tea, coffee
and herbs.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mars Khaimov, Esq.
14749 71st Ave.
Flushing, NY 11367
Phone: (917) 915-7415
Email: mars@khaimovlaw.com
CAL CARTAGE: Hernandez Suit Removed to C.D. California
------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Maryolin Hernandez, individually, and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. CAL CARTAGE WAREHOUSING
& TRANSLOADING LLC, a limited liability company; EMPLOYER'S
OUTSOURCING, LLC a limited liability company; and DOES 1 through
10, inclusive, Case No. 23STCV19093 was removed from the Superior
Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, to
the United States District Court for the Central District of
California on Sept. 29, 2023, and assigned Case No. 2:23-cv-08179.
The Complaint asserts the following eight causes of action: failure
to pay minimum wages; failure to pay overtime compensation; failure
to provide meal periods; failure to authorize and permit rest
breaks; failure to indemnify necessary business expenses; failure
to timely pay final wages at termination; failure to provide
accurate itemized wage statements; and unfair and unlawful business
practices.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Allison S. Wallin, Esq.
LITTLER MENDELSON P.C.
2049 Century Park East, 5th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067.3107
Phone: 310.553.0308
Fax: 800.715.1330
Email: awallin@littler.com
- and -
Alvin Arceo, Esq.
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
333 Bush Street, 34th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Phone: 415.433.1940
Fax: 415.399.8490
Email: aarceo@littler.com
CAMBER ENERGY: Class Action Suit Over Diluted Shares Dismissed
--------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Bultman of Bloomberg Law reports that Camber Energy Inc.
beat a lawsuit alleging it misled investors about its share count
while an investment fund significantly diluted the oil and gas
company's shares.
The proposed class action was filed in 2021, seeking to recover
money investors lost when a report by a short seller knocked
Houston-based Camber's stock price down by over 70%. The report,
from Kerrisdale Capital, said the market was "badly mistaken" about
the company's share count.
Judge Charles Eskridge in the US District Court for the Southern
District of Texas said Camber disclosed in securities filings "all
that it was required to". [GN]
CANADA: Faces Suit Over Disability Payments in Military Veterans
----------------------------------------------------------------
Aidan Macnab of Canadian Lawyer reports that the lawyer involved in
a recent class action against the federal government on behalf of
military veterans says the fact that it took under two years to
resolve is a positive sign for the justice system.
A class of 8,600 injured Canadian military veterans who were not
paid a portion of the disability payments they were entitled to had
their case heard on the merits in that time period.
"Civil litigation can be really slow these days," says Daniel
Wallace, lawyer for the class and a partner at the Halifax office
of McInnes Cooper. "Not many class actions are litigated and
determined on their merits, and this is one was a good example of
moving quickly through the process."
The class used the Federal Court process and got a preliminary
determination through a question of law motion for the sole common
issue. The federal government settled, and around half of the class
members will receive retroactive benefits before June 2024. The
other half will before June 2025.
The case dealt with the interpretation of Division 2, Part III(B)
of the Canadian Armed Forces Service Income Security Insurance
Plan, Policy 901102. The policy governs the long-term disability
benefits for certain Armed Forces members. The class
representative, Simon Logan, joined the military in 1988, serving
in the infantry, air force, and special operations, including in
Afghanistan. Due to health issues developed from the job, he got an
involuntary medical release in 2016. Logan was entitled to a
monthly long-term disability benefit. He argued that the Crown had
left certain allowances off the calculation of his monthly income.
For members of the armed forces, a large portion of their
compensation may be allowances that recognize they are in a
uniquely tough job or difficult conditions, says Wallace. These
include a northern allowance, an isolation allowance, and an
allowance for service members deployed to a submarine, for
example.
On top of his salary as a warrant officer, Logan made $3,730 per
month from a "special operations assaulter allowance" and another
approximately $130 for a "post living differential" and "civilian
dress allowance." So, close to $4,000 was not factored into his
monthly long-term disability payments.
Logan came to Wallace with an unrelated legal question, but Wallace
was familiar with the long-term disability policy and identified
the error, he says.
The class used the Federal Court process and got a preliminary
determination through a question of law motion for the sole common
issue. The federal government settled, and around half of the class
members will receive retroactive benefits before June 2024. The
other half will before June 2025.
The case dealt with the interpretation of Division 2, Part III(B)
of the Canadian Armed Forces Service Income Security Insurance
Plan, Policy 901102. The policy governs the long-term disability
benefits for certain Armed Forces members. The class
representative, Simon Logan, joined the military in 1988, serving
in the infantry, air force, and special operations, including in
Afghanistan. Due to health issues developed from the job, he got an
involuntary medical release in 2016. Logan was entitled to a
monthly long-term disability benefit. He argued that the Crown had
left certain allowances off the calculation of his monthly income.
For members of the armed forces, a large portion of their
compensation may be allowances that recognize they are in a
uniquely tough job or difficult conditions, says Wallace. These
include a northern allowance, an isolation allowance, and an
allowance for service members deployed to a submarine, for
example.
On top of his salary as a warrant officer, Logan made $3,730 per
month from a "special operations assaulter allowance" and another
approximately $130 for a "post living differential" and "civilian
dress allowance." So, close to $4,000 was not factored into his
monthly long-term disability payments.
Logan came to Wallace with an unrelated legal question, but Wallace
was familiar with the long-term disability policy and identified
the error, he says. [GN]
CARESOURCE: Stevens Sues Over Failure to Safeguard PII & PHI
------------------------------------------------------------
Tiffany Stevens, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. CARESOURCE, Case No. 3:23-cv-00263-MJN-PBS (S.D. Ohio,
Sept. 8, 2023), is brought against CareSource for its failure to
properly secure and safeguard Plaintiff's and other similarly
situated CareSource patients' personally identifiable information
("PII") and protected health information ("PHI"), including first
and last name, date of birth, address, gender, social security
number, member identification number, plan name, health condition,
medications, allergies, and diagnosis (the "Private Information"),
from criminal hackers.
On September 5, 2023, CareSource sent out data breach letters to
individuals, including Plaintiff Stevens, notifying them that their
Private Information was compromised as a result of the hacking
incident. On July 27, 2023, CareSource also filed official notice
of a hacking incident with the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services. Under state and federal law, organizations must report
breaches involving protected health information within at least 60
days.
Based on the Notice sent to impacted individuals, on May 31, 2023,
one of CareSource's software vendors, used to "share data" "was
hacked by a bad actor." In response, Defendant "patched the
software" and launched an investigation CareSource's investigation
revealed that an unauthorized party had accessed and obtained
certain files that contained sensitive patient information on May
31, 2023, (the "Data Breach"). Yet, the public was not made aware
that they were at risk until more than three months after the Data
Breach occurred.
As a result of this delayed response, Plaintiff and "Class Members"
had no idea for over three months that their Private Information
had been compromised and that they were, and continue to be, at
significant risk of identity theft and various other forms of
personal, social, and financial harm. This risk will remain for
their respective lifetimes.
There has been no assurance offered by CareSource that all personal
data or copies of data have been recovered or destroyed, or that
Defendant has adequately enhanced its data security practices
sufficient to avoid a similar breach of its network in the future.
The Plaintiff and Class Members have suffered and are at an
imminent, immediate, and continuing increased risk of suffering,
ascertainable losses in the form of harm from identity theft and
other fraudulent misuse of their Private Information, the loss of
the benefit of their bargain, out-of-pocket expenses incurred to
remedy or mitigate the effects of the Data Breach, and the value of
their time reasonably incurred to remedy or mitigate the effects of
the Data Breach, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is an individual citizen of the State of Georgia.
CareSource is a leading healthcare coverage organization that
specializes in Medicaid managed care plans.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Terence R. Coates, Esq.
Dylan J. Gould, Esq.
MARKOVITS STOCK & DEMARCO, LLC
119 E. Court Street, Suite 530
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Phone: (513) 651-3700
Fax: (513) 665-0219
Email: tcoates@msdlegal.com
dgould@msdlegal.com
- and -
Mason Barney, Esq.
Tyler Bean, Esq.
SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, New York 10151
Phone: (212) 532-1091
Email: mbarney@sirillp.com
tbean@sirillp.com
CVS HEALTH: Faces Osterhaus Suit Over Improper Pharmacies' Fees
---------------------------------------------------------------
OSTERHAUS PHARMACY, INC., individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CVS HEALTH CORPORATION; CVS
PHARMACY, INC.; CAREMARK Rx, L.L.C. (f/k/a/ CAREMARK Rx, INC.);
CAREMARK, L.L.C.; CAREMARKPCS, L.L.C.; CAREMARK PCS HEALTH L.L.C.;
CAREMARK IPA, L.L.C.; CAREMARK PART D SERVICES, LLC; AETNA INC.;
AETNA HEALTH HOLDINGS, LLC; and AETNA HEALTH MANAGEMENT, LLC,
Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-01500 (W.D. Wa.,Sept. 26, 2023)
alleges violation of the Sherman Act.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendants denied
pharmacies access to the Defendants' network of Medicare Part D
beneficiaries to fill and dispense their prescriptions unless the
pharmacies also enter a second transaction involving a performance
program that compels the pharmacies to pay fees for the
"opportunity" to provide other performance-related services.
Likewise, the Defendants forced pharmacies, including the Plaintiff
and members of the proposed class, to agree to grant it discretion
in setting metrics for and calculating the fees pharmacies must
pay. The Defendants then exercised that discretion in bad faith and
thereby breached the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, says
the suit.
CVS HEALTH CORPORATION provides health care and retail pharmacy
services. The Company offers prescription medications, beauty,
personal care, cosmetics, and health care products, as well as
pharmacy benefit management, disease management, and administrative
services. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Beth E. Terrell
Blythe H. Chandler
Amanda M. Steiner
TERRELL MARSHALL LAW GROUP PLLC
936 North 34th Street, Suite 300
Seattle, WA 98103-8869
Telephone: (206) 816-6603
Facsimile: (206) 319-5450
Email: bterrell@terrellmarshall.com
bchandler@terrellmarshall.com
asteiner@terrellmarshall.com
- and -
Joshua Davis
Julie Pollock,
BERGER MONTAGUE P.C.
505 Montgomery St, Suite 625
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 906-0684
Email: jdavis@bm.net
jpollock@bm.net
- and -
John Roberti, Esq.
Melissa Maxman, Esq.
Derek Jackson, Esq.
Alisa Lu, Esq.
COHEN & GRESSER LLP
2001 Pennsylvania Ave, NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 851-2070
Email: mmaxman@cohengresser.com
jroberti@cohengresser.com
djackson@cohengresser.com
alu@cohengresser.com
D.R. HORTON: Homeowners Get $20M Deal in Negligence Class Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Taylor Farmer of 7 News wspa.com reports that almost four years
after a lawsuit was filed, 220 homeowners in the subdivision Rose
Hill are now being awarded a total of over $20 million.
A lawsuit was filed in 2019 claiming negligence against D.R. Horton
and breach of implied warranty against third party JLS Masonry.
A jury decided D.R. Horton would pay $15 million in damages and JLS
Masonry would pay $4 million. The total of damages reached $22
million, given other subcontractors involved, reaching a gross
amount of close to $100,000 per home.
"No it doesn't hurt them (D.R. Horton)," Plaintiff's Attorney
Justin Lucey said. "They need more consumers to hold them
accountable for them to even notice."
Justin Lucey, the attorney representing the homeowners, said D.R.
Horton has earned billions of dollars per year building what he
called defective homes. He said their defense in this case was one
he couldn't believe.
"One of their main defenses in this case is that everybody does it,
all of the other builders do it, this is the new industry
standard," Lucey said. "When I heard that the first time, I was
just shocked. Imagine America's number one builder advocating a
factual defense that this is how everyone does it."
Lucey said the goal in this case was about finding a way to fund
repairs for his clients to be able to live comfortably and safely
in their homes.
"A homeowner actually testified that some stones fell off her house
and hit her in the head when she was walking out of the garage,"
Lucey said.
The state of South Carolina is a fix or disclose state, meaning you
have to disclose defects to a home buyer or you can be sued for
them. Lucey said not fixing these problems with the homes would
impact future sales of the homes.
"They call themselves production builders, but we refer to them as
track home builders," Lucey said. "What they are doing in this
state, and other states, but obviously I have more concern about
this state, what they are doing throughout this state is just
wrong." [GN]
DC FOUNDATIONS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Belitz Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------
MATT BELITZ, individually, and on behalf of himself and others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DC FOUNDATIONS, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 3:23-cv-00350 (E.D. Tenn., Sept. 27, 2023) seeks to
recover from the Defendant unpaid wages and overtime compensation,
interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the
Fair Labor Standards Act.
Plaintiff Belitz was employed by the Defendant as a staff.
DC FOUNDATIONS, INC. is a construction company located in
Knoxville, Tennessee. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. Russ Bryant, Esq.
Gordon E. Jackson, Esq.
James L. Holt, Jr., Esq.
J. Joseph Leatherwood IV, Esq.
JACKSON, SHIELDS, YEISER, HOLT OWEN & BRYANT
262 German Oak Drive
Memphis, TN 38018
Telephone: (901) 754-8001
Facsimile: (901) 754-8524
Email: gjackson@jsyc.com
rbryant@jsyc.com
jholt@jsyc.com
jleatherwood@jsyc.com
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE: Villalta Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Environmental Science
Associates, et al. The case is styled as Maya Diaz Villalta, on
behalf of herself and on behalf of other persons similarly situated
v. Environmental Science Associates, et al., Case No. 23CV009167
(Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Sept. 27, 2023).
Environmental Science Associates -- https://esassoc.com/ -- is a
environmental science and planning firm.[BN]
EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Neubauer Files FCRA Suit in D. Oregon
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Equifax Information
Services, LLC, et al. The case is styled as Mark Neubauer, on
behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Equifax
Information Services, LLC, LVNV Funding LLC, Case No.
3:23-cv-01275-YY (D. Ore., Aug. 31, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act.
Equifax Information Services LLC -- http://www.equifax.com/--
provides data solutions. The Company offers financial, consumer and
commercial data, and analytical solutions.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert S. Sola, Esq.
ROBERT S. SOLA, P.C.
1500 SW First Avenue, Suite 800
Portland, OR 97201
Phone: (503) 295-6880
Fax: (503) 243-4546
Email: rssola@msn.com
- and -
James A. Francis, Esq.
John Soumilas, Esq.
Jordan M. Sartell, Esq.
FRANCIS MAILMAN SOUMILAS P.C.
1600 Market Street, Suite 2510
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Phone: (215) 735-8600
Fax: (215) 940-8000
Email: jfrancis@consumerlawfirm.com
jsoumilas@consumerlawfirm.com
jsartell@consumerlawfirm.com
EXPERIAN INFORMATION: Lelinger Suit Removed to S.D. Florida
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Zeev Lelinger, on behalf of himself and all
other similarly situated consumers v. Experian Information
Solutions Inc., Newrez LLC d/b/a Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing,
Case No. COSO-23-005529 was removed from the 17th Judicial Circuit,
Broward County FL, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of Florida on Sept. 7, 2023.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 0:23-cv-61720-JIC to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Consumer Credit.
Experian Information Solutions, Inc. -- https://www.experian.com/
-- operates as an information services company. The Company offers
credit information, analytical tools, and marketing services.[BN]
The Plaintiffs is represented by:
Ely Robert Levy, Esq.
Omar Mauricio Salazar, II, Esq.
LEVY & PARTNERS, PLLC
3230 Stirling Road, Suite 1
Hollywood, FL 33021
Email: elevy@lawlp.com
omar@lawlp.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Taylor Rose Cavaliere, Esq.
JONES DAY
600 Brickell Avenue, Suite 3300
Miami, FL 33131
Phone: (305) 714-9831
Email: tcavaliere@jonesday.com
- and -
Celia Chapman Falzone, Esq.
AKERMAN SENTERFITT EIDSON
50 N Laura Street, Suite 2500
Jacksonville, FL 32202
Phone: (904) 598-8644
Email: celia.falzone@akerman.com
- and -
Marc Jonathan Gottlieb, Esq.
AKERMAN LLP
201 E. Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1800
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Phone: (954) 463-2700
Email: marc.gottlieb@akerman.com
- and -
William Patrick Heller, Esq.
AKERMAN LLP
Las Olas Centre
350 E Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1600
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-0006
Phone: (954) 463-2700
Fax: 463-2224
Email: william.heller@akerman.com
F21 OPCO LLC: Robinson Sues Over Cyberattack and Data Breach
------------------------------------------------------------
Kyra Robinson, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. F21 OPCO LLC d/b/a FOREVER 21, Case No.
2:23-cv-07398-MEMF-AGR (C.D. Cal., Sept. 7, 2023), is brought
arising out of the recent targeted cyberattack and data breach
("Data Breach") on Defendant's network that resulted in the
disclosure of 539,027 Class
Members' Private Information and to address Defendant's inadequate
safeguarding of Plaintiff's and Class Members' Private Information
that it collected and maintained.
As a result of the Data Breach, The Plaintiff and Class Members had
their most sensitive personal information accessed, exfiltrated,
and stolen, causing them to suffer ascertainable losses in the form
of the loss of the benefit of their bargain, out-of-pocket expenses
and the value of their time reasonably incurred to remedy or
mitigate the effects of the attack. Information compromised in the
Data Breach includes individuals' names, Social Security number,
date of birth, bank account numbers, and information regarding
employee health plans including enrollment information and premiums
paid (collectively, "Private Information" or "PII" and "PHI")
disclosed.
The Defendant maintained the Private Information in a reckless and
negligent manner. In particular, the Private Information was
maintained on Defendant's computer system and network in a
condition vulnerable to cyberattacks. The mechanism of the
cyberattack and potential for improper disclosure of Plaintiff's
and Class Members' Private Information was a known risk to
Defendant, and thus Defendant was on notice that failing to take
steps necessary to secure the Private Information from those risks
left that property in a dangerous condition. Plaintiff's and Class
Members' identities are now at risk because of
The Defendant's negligent conduct because the Private Information
that Defendant collected and maintained was exposed and is now in
the hands of data thieves. As a result of the Data Breach,
Plaintiff and Class Members have been exposed to a heightened and
imminent risk of financial and medical fraud and identity theft.
Plaintiff and Class Members must now and in the future closely
monitor their financial and healthcare accounts to guard against
identity theft, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff received a letter from Defendant dated August 29,
2023 on that date (the "Notice of Data Breach Letter").
The Defendant is a clothing and accessories retailer that is known
as the authority on fashion & the go-to retailer for the latest
trends, styles, and deals.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bryan L. Bleichner, Esq.
CHESTNUT CAMBRONNE PA
100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 1700
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Phone: (612) 339-7300
Email: bbleichner@chesnutcambronne.com
- and -
Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLPS GROSSMAN, LLC
227 W. Monroe St., Ste. 2100
Chicago, IL 60606
Phone: (866) 252-0878
Email: gklinger@milberg.com
FIRST UNITED: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Bike Suit Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------
KAI BIKE, individually and on behalf of all similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. FIRST UNITED BANK & TRUST COMPANY, Defendant, Case No.
4:23-cv-03637 (S.D. Tex., Sept. 27, 2023) seeks to recover from the
Defendant unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest,
liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
Plaintiff Bike was employed by the Defendant as a mortgage loan
consultant.
FIRST UNITED BANK AND TRUST COMPANY operates as a bank. The Bank
accepts deposits, makes loans, and provides other services for the
public. First United Bank and Trust serves clients in the United
States. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Josef F. Buenker, Esq.
THE BUENKER LAW FIRM
Houston, TX 77206
Telephone: (713) 868-3388
Facsimile: (713) 683-9940
Email: jbuenker@buenkerlaw.com
FIRSTENERGY CORP: Faces Class Suit Over Illegal Debt Collection
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Tony of Charleston Gazette - Mail reports that a Preston
County resident has filed a federal class-action lawsuit against a
FirstEnergy subsidiary alleging FirstEnergy routinely violates West
Virginia debt collection laws.
Alexa Putorek of Reedsville filed a lawsuit last week contending
FirstEnergy unlawfully and deceptively charges customers fees as
high as $4.75 each time a customer makes a payment online or by
phone, imposing fees significantly higher than the actual cost to
the utility to process the payments.
"These fees 'nickel and dime' FirstEnergy's captive consumers while
providing hundreds of thousands of dollars in revenue to it," the
lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of West Virginia asserts.
The complaint contends consumers' agreements with FirstEnergy don't
expressly provide for the fees and that no law authorizes charging
them, constituting a violation of the state's Consumer Credit and
Protection Act.
Putorek's complaint says she brought the lawsuit on behalf of all
presumed class members to stop FirstEnergy from charging what she
says are unlawful pay-to-pay fees and to compensate members for
losses incurred due to FirstEnergy's business practices.
The lawsuit says Putorek, through counsel, asked for information on
whether the state Public Service Commission had authorized electric
utilities to charge pay-to-pay fees. The lawsuit uses pay-to-pay
fees as a term to describe convenience fees, processing fees and
'E-Z Pay' fees, a reference to a FirstEnergy online payment
system.
The PSC didn't identify any such authorization given to the
defendant, according to the lawsuit.
Putorek's lawsuit says FirstEnergy charged her fees ranging from $4
to $16.77 to pay online, with the amounts debited from her bank
account.
The complaint asserts the cost FirstEnergy incurred to process
Putorek's electronic payments were much lower than the pay-to-pay
fees it charged.
The lawsuit cites a passage of the Consumer Credit and Protection
Act prohibiting the collection of or attempt to collect any fee
incidental to a principal obligation unless the fee is explicitly
authorized by the agreement allowing the obligation and by statute
or regulation.
Putorek's complaint proposes a class consisting of anyone who had a
FirstEnergy residential utility agreement on a West Virginia
property and paid a fee for making a payment to FirstEnergy by
internet or phone within four years prior to the date a class is
certified.
FirstEnergy's West Virginia utilities, Mon Power and Potomac
Edison, serve roughly 550,000 customers, FirstEnergy said in June.
FirstEnergy spokesperson Hannah Catlett said on September 22, 2023
the company was reviewing the complaint and declined to comment on
it.
Catlett said FirstEnergy "works hard to keep costs affordable and
manageable for our customers" and offers payment options that
include check, one-time checking or savings account draft, and
automatic checking, savings or credit card draft. Catlett noted
customers can explore ways to pay at
https://www.firstenergycorp.com/help/billingpayments.html.
FirstEnergy's webpage notes service fees will apply to one-time
credit card or debit card payments, and that service fees may apply
to payments made in person or through FirstEnergy's automated phone
system. The webpage states KUBRA is a third party with whom
FirstEnergy Service Company has contracted on behalf of FirstEnergy
utilities to provide payment options.
KUBRA is a billing, payment and alerts provider for utility,
government and insurance entities with its United States
headquarters in Tempe, Arizona.
A PSC spokesperson did not provide comment.
The PSC this month selected an accounting firm to audit Mon Power
and Potomac Edison lobbying expenses in a review that will cover
costs charged to the FirstEnergy utilities related to the largest
bribery scandal in Ohio history.
The agency selected Rhode Island-based Van Reen Accounting LLC to
perform the audit, just shy of six months after the agency ordered
the review on March 2.
The scope of the PSC audit is to include lobbying and other costs
of all FirstEnergy companies related to Ohio House Bill 6.
Ohio House Bill 6 was a 2019 billion-dollar bailout of FirstEnergy
nuclear plants in Ohio. A federal jury found a former speaker of
the Ohio House of Representatives and a former Ohio Republican
Party chair guilty of participating in a racketeering conspiracy to
pass the measure.
The jury found former speaker Larry Householder and former party
chairman Matthew Borges guilty on March 9 of wire fraud, receipt of
millions of dollars in bribes and money laundering in a
racketeering enterprise that received roughly $60 million from
FirstEnergy and its affiliates to help secure House Bill 6.
In July 2021, FirstEnergy agreed to pay a $230 million penalty upon
admitting the utility and FirstEnergy Service Company conspired
with public officials and other entities to pay and conceal
millions of dollars through wire transfers to support passage of
the legislation.
FirstEnergy admitted that FirstEnergy Service Company paid $60
million to Generation Now from 2017 to March 2020.
Generation Now was a purported social welfare organization whose
real purpose was receiving undisclosed donations as a benefit to
Householder, according to FirstEnergy's 2021 deferred prosecution
agreement with federal prosecutors in Ohio.
FirstEnergy has asserted its spending on the Ohio plant bailout has
had no rate impact on West Virginia customers.
The PSC approved a $91.8 million rate increase to cover Mon Power
and Potomac Edison fuel costs in December. The rate hike followed a
$94 million rate hike the PSC approved for the utilities in May
2022, also for fuel costs. That followed a $19.5 million fuel cost
rate increase approved in December 2021.
Last month, Mon Power and Potomac Edison asked the PSC for a
roughly $167.5 million increase in customers' rate to cover fuel
costs effective Jan. 1, 2024.
The utilities already had a request pending before the PSC for a
$207.4 million, 13% increase in customers' base rate — the rate
that accounts for all utility service expenses, including operating
and maintenance costs, taxes and depreciation.
Included in the $207.4 million rate hike request case is a
controversial Mon Power and Potomac Edison proposal to adjust the
amount a customer is credited for either kilowatt-hours produced in
a month or excess kilowatt-hours credited against a future month to
the wholesale price level for energy.
Net metering is a billing mechanism that credits customers who
generate their own electricity from solar power for returning the
electricity they don't use back into the grid.
The change would be effective for customers who enroll in a net
energy metering rider after March 27, 2024.
Opponents say the wholesale price of energy would be lower than the
retail rate of energy.
"These power companies want to end customers getting full credit
and want to only give a 'wholesale' price, less than what customers
pay for power," West Virginians for Energy Freedom, a coalition of
community organizations, businesses, municipalities and elected
officials, said in an Aug. 16 news release.
The PSC has reported receiving 657 comments against and zero
comments for the Mon Power and Potomac Edison base rate hike
proposal filed May 31. [GN]
FRANCHISE WORLD: Abdulhadi Files ADA Suit in C.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Franchise World
Headquarters, LLC. The case is styled as Ali Abdulhadi, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated v. Franchise World
Headquarters, LLC, Case No. 2:23-cv-07202-RGK-MRW (C.D. Cal., Aug.
31, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Franchise World Headquarters, Inc operates and franchises subway
restaurants.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert Sibilia, Esq.
Oceanside Law Center
P O Box 861
Oceanside, CA 92049
Phone: (760) 666-1151
Fax: (818) 698-0300
Email: sibilialaw@aol.com
GENWORTH FINANCIAL: Manar Files Suit in E.D. Virginia
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Genworth Financial,
Inc. The case is styled as April Manar, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. Genworth Financial, Inc., Case
No. 3:23-cv-00560-RCY (E.D. Va., Aug. 30, 2023).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Civil Rights.
Genworth Financial -- http://www.genworth.com/-- provides life
insurance, long-term care insurance, mortgage insurance, and
annuities.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Erin Elizabeth Jewell, Esq.
William Wesley Coleman Harty, Esq.
HARTY JEWELL, PLLC
6515 George Washington Mem Hwy, Suite 205
Yorktown, VA 23692
Phone: (757) 568-9635
Fax: (757) 703-0357
Email: erin@hartyjewell.com
will@hartyjewell.com
- and -
Maureen M. Brady, Esq.
MCSHANE & BRADY, LLC (MO-NA)
1656 Washington Street, Suite 120
Kansas City, MO 64108
Phone: (816) 888-8010
Fax: (816) 332-6295
Email: mbrady@mcshanebradylaw.com
- and -
Sharon Zinns, Esq.
ZINNS LAW, LLC (GA-NA)
4243 Dunwoody Club Drive, Suite 104
Atlanta, GA 30350
Phone: (404) 882-9002
Email: sharon@zinnslaw.com
GREAT AMERICAN: Schuchmann Files TCPA Suit in M.D. Pennsylvania
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Great American Power,
LLC. The case is styled as Wendy Schuchmann, on behalf of herself
and others similarly situated v. Great American Power, LLC, Case
No. 2:23-cv-02041-ROS (M.D. Pa., Sept. 27, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.
Great American Electric -- https://www.greatamericanpower.com/ --
is a full service Electrical Contractor that specializes in
commercial, residential, service work, and aluminium wire
repair.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jacob U Ginsburg, Esq.
KIMMEL & SILVERMAN, PC
30 E. Butler Ave., Ste. 215
Ambler, PA 19002
Phone: (267) 468-5374
Email: jginsburg@creditlaw.com
- and -
Max Morgan, Esq.
THE WEITZ FIRM, LLC
1515 Market Street, Suite #1100
Philadelphia, PA 19102
Phone: (267) 587-6240
Fax: (215) 689-0875
Email: max.morgan@theweitzfirm.com
HEARTLAND RESOLUTIONS: Taylor Files FDCPA Suit in C.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Heartland Resolutions
Group. The case is styled as Phadarius Taylor, individually and
behalf of others similarly situated v. Heartland Resolutions Group,
Case No. 5:23-cv-01762-MWF-MAR (C.D. Cal., Aug. 30, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.
Heartland Resolution Group, LLC -- https://www.heartland-rg.com/ --
is a debt collection agency.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert Sibilia, Esq.
Oceanside Law Center
P O Box 861
Oceanside, CA 92049
Phone: (760) 666-1151
Fax: (818) 698-0300
Email: sibilialaw@aol.com
I-HEALTH INC: Warren Sues Over False and Misleading Marketing
-------------------------------------------------------------
Ethel Warren, and Christian Campos, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. I-HEALTH, INC., Case No.
2:23-cv-01926-AC (E.D. Cal., Sept. 7, 2023), is brought on behalf
of consumers who purchased Defendant's Culturelle Ultimate Balance
for Antibiotics products that are marketed, sold, and distributed
by Defendant ("Products"), to halt Defendant's unlawful sales and
marketing of its Products and for damages they sustained as a
result of the illegal sales and false and misleading marketing.
The Defendant markets, sells, and distributes the Products in
capsules, for adults, and chewables, for kids. The Products are
mislabeled and misrepresented to Plaintiffs and the proposed Class.
Specifically, the Products' labels and marketing state that they
"rebuild bacterial balance lost to antibiotic use." The Defendant's
representations that the Products rebuild bacterial balance lost to
antibiotic use is false, misleading, and reasonably likely to
deceive the public.
The Defendant's prominent and systematic mislabeling of the
Products and its false and deceptive advertising form a pattern of
unlawful and unfair business practices that harm the public and, if
unstopped, could lead to substantial societal harm. The Defendant
makes improper disease claims without mandated disclaimers next to
its marketing statements in violation of the Food and Drug
Administration ("FDA") regulations. As such, the Products are
misbranded under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ("FDCA") and are,
thus, illegal to sell and worthless, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff purchased the Products for her personal use on
various occasions within the applicable statute of limitations.
The Defendant manufactures, markets, and sells the Products
throughout California and the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kristen Lake Cardoso, Esq.
Jeff Ostrow, Esq.
KOPELOWITZ OSTROW P.A.
One West Las Olas, Suite 500
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Phone: (954) 525-4100
Email: cardoso@kolawyers.com
ostrow@kolawyers.com
JLT RISK: Settlement Approval in Suit Over Fiduciary Duties Sought
------------------------------------------------------------------
Insurancenews.com.au reports that Victorian Supreme Court approval
is being sought for a settlement of the local government class
action against JLT, with a legal notice showing that councils won't
receive compensation from the firm under the proposals.
Supreme Court orders made on September 18 approved the distribution
of a covering email and notice to all group members. The notice
says that the parties have "agreed to settle the JLT Victoria class
action" and that they are seeking court approval to end the
proceeding.
"This means that the JLT Victoria Class Action will no longer be on
foot, and the plaintiffs and group members will not receive any
compensation from JLT," the notice of proposed discontinuance
says.
Group members have until October 16 to object, ahead of a court
approval hearing listed for November 15, the orders made by Justice
Kevin Lyons say.
The class action against JLT was commenced in the Supreme Court on
June 28 2019, with Moira Shire Council and Hobsons Bay City Council
the first and second plaintiffs.
Councils took action after becoming dissatisfied with the JLT
Municipal Asset Protection Plan, which provided a pooled fund to
manage the property and financial risks of municipal councils and
other local government bodies.
The claim alleged that JLT breached general law, contractual and
fiduciary duties it owed to group members, "who suffered loss or
damage through payment of excessive premiums and through JLT's
receipt of undisclosed commissions and profits".
"We have always stated that we will vigorously defend our position
in the class action as we strongly believed that the allegations
were misguided," a JLT spokesperson told insuranceNEWS.com.au on
September 26, 2023.
The discontinuance notice advises that the councils and JLT entered
into an agreement on September 13 to resolve the JLT Victoria Class
Action, subject to the court's approval.
The proposed terms outlined in the notice include that the class
action be discontinued with no order as to costs, which means
councils other than the plaintiffs who have provided a release to
JLT, may individually proceed with their claims if they wish.
Law firm Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan also undertakes that it
will not act for any local council in any state or territory in
bringing or making a claim against JLT concerning issues the same
or similar to the Victorian proceeding and will not "induce,
encourage or procure any such local council to bring or make such a
claim". Similar terms would apply to Harbour Litigation Funding.
A separate local government class action was heard in the NSW
Supreme Court in 2021, with councils arguing that JLT had breached
its duties in failing to point out cheaper insurance alternatives
in the market compared to the pooled scheme.
Justice Kate Williams last December found in favour of JLT in that
case, ruling the firm was not acting as a broker for individual
councils in conflict with its role as an adviser for the Statewide
mutual scheme. [GN]
LACTALIS AMERICAN: Court Dismisses Suit Over Mislabeled Feta Cheese
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Keller and Heckman LLP of Lexology reports that a federal judge in
New York dismissed a class action lawsuit alleging that a feta
cheese package would deceive a reasonable consumer into believing
the product had been made in Greece. We commented on this lawsuit
when it was filed in August 2022, noting that the plaintiff's
success could depend on whether the package explicitly used the
country name.
The lawsuit, filed against Lactalis America Group Inc. on August
14, 2022, claimed that the labeling of the company's President
brand feta cheese falsely led consumers to believe that the product
is made in Greece based on:
-- Representation that the company is "Europe's leading cheese
expert;"
-- The depiction of a gold olive branch; and
-- The word "feta" stylized in an "ancient-Greek font."
In addition, the back label of the package states the cheese was
"created by a family of artisan cheesemakers with over 80 years of
French heritage" and "distributed in 'Buffalo, NY.'"
According to the judge, these facts are insufficient to state a
claim that consumers would have been misled into believing the
product is made in Greece. He stated in his opinion that "while a
discerning shopper may associate feta cheese with Greek tradition,
it is unreasonable to conclude that reasonable consumers would
expect that a mass-produce cheese product was made in Greece based
on little more than a font style, and in the absence of any
statement that the product was made in Greece." He also noted that
without a statement that the product is made in Greece, "no
reasonable consumer" would view the statement that the product is
distributed in "Buffalo, NY" and referencing "French heritage" and
automatically conclude that the product is made in Greece.
The judge further dismissed the plaintiff's remaining claims of
unjust enrichment, negligent misrepresentation, fraud, and
violations of express warranty, implied warranty, and the
Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act for failure to state a claim, as well as
a multistate misrepresentation claim due to lack of standing. [GN]
LENDINGTREE LLC: Agrees to Settle Data Breach Suit for $875,000
---------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Brown of Bloomberg Law reports that LendingTree LLC
will pay $875,000 to settle claims it failed to protect the
personal information of 200,000 people that was exposed in a
February 2022 data breach, under a deal given initial approval by a
federal court.
Christopher Lamie and Amabel Lin alleged that LendingTree failed to
implement basic data-security practices and failed to abide by
industry standards related to the protection of sensitive
information.
Class members will be eligible for up to $10,000 in reimbursement
for documented economic losses arising from the breach, up to $250
in payments for lost time calculated at a rate of $25 per hour.
[GN]
MONTANA: Overcharges Residential Property Taxes, Class Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
Darrell Ehrlick of Daily Montanan reports that a former and a
current lawmaker are hoping to do what neither the Legislature nor
the Montana Attorney General was willing to do -- challenge
residential property taxes.
In a class-action lawsuit filed in Yellowstone County on September
26, 2023, attorney Matthew Monforton, a former Republican lawmaker,
and current lawmaker Sen. Brad Molnar, R-Laurel, allege that the
state is continuing to overcharge residential taxpayers of the
state, and the suit insists that the maximum Montana can tax is far
lower than the rates established by the Montana Department of
Revenue.
The crux of the lawsuit is an allegation that Montana has, for more
than a decade, misapplied state statute, which constrains how much
the state can charge. The court documents claim that Montana is
limited to charging no more than one-half the rate of inflation for
the prior three years.
The lawsuit also charges that Montana has incorrectly interpreted
state law since 1999 by allowing itself to "bank" unused mills --
the rates at which property is taxed -- to use them in the future
when it needs.
Rapidly escalating property values, coupled by Montana's
residential property re-appraisal cycle, have created a sort of
"sticker shock" syndrome as property tax assessments have been sent
out.
Monforton, the attorney representing Molnar who brought the suit,
argues that the law, passed in 2001, allows only "a local
governmental entity" to bank unused tax caps -- a provision that he
said was meant to help counties or cities that were being fiscally
conservative but may need the extra revenue in future years.
Monforton said that nothing in state law allows the Department of
Revenue or the state to bank unused mills as it has done this year.
Molnar, through the lawsuit, claims that language in state statute
is very clear about local entities.
State law currently caps the residential mill levy rate at 95, for
education. However, the lawsuit argues the mill levy is subject to
the inflation rate. Monforton and Molnar said that the State of
Montana should have only been allowed to levy 77.89 mills instead
of 95 mills. The extra 17.11 mills will result in more than $80
million of extra revenue that will create a surplus.
While neither the Department of Revenue nor the Governor's Office
responded to inquiries from the Daily Montanan about the
class-action claim, Monforton said that the state has decided to
tack on the extra 17.11 mills from unused tax mills from previous
years, a practice that it has used previously but not to this
extent.
"They have done it previously by one or two mills, not by 17,"
Monforton said. "And past illegalities by the Department of Revenue
do not justify future illegalities."
Molnar and Monforton argue that state lawmakers never intended to
give the state or the Department of Revenue the same authority to
"bank" unused property tax caps. Instead, "local governmental
entities" mean counties or cities -- an argument that hasn't been
explored.
With support from all 56 counties, Beaverhead County previously
urged Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen to issue an advisory
opinion on the issue. Advisory opinions by the Attorney General can
have the force of law until a court rules on the matter. However,
recent requests by those counties have went ignored.
Molnar had also called on lawmakers to hold a special session to
change the residential property tax rate, but the leadership of the
Republican Party in both the state's House and Senate seemed cold
to the idea, instead supporting a different GOP plan for property
tax rebates of as much as $675 per property owner.
Monforton and Molnar filed the complaint as a class action, meaning
that if a Yellowstone County judge certifies the motion, it could
mean that other "similarly situated" residents -- meaning virtually
any property owner in the state -- could be included as part of the
case or eligible for relief. [GN]
MP2 ENTERPRISES: Fails to Pay Proper wages, Brandi-Vanmeter Claims
------------------------------------------------------------------
REBECCA BRANDI‐VANMETER, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MP2 ENTERPRISES, LLC; BRYANT
PETERSON; LAYNE PETERSON, Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-00676 (D.
Utah., Sept. 27, 2023) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid
wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages,
attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Plaintiff Brandi was employed by the Defendants as a delivery
driver.
MP2 ENTERPRISES, LLC is a Pizza Hut Franchise operating in Alaska,
Arizona, Utah, and Nevada. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Randall L. Jeffs, Esq.
JEFFS & JEFFS, P.C.
90 North 100 East
Provo, UT 84603
Telephone: (801) 373‐8848
Email: rzjeffs@jeffslawoffice.com
NEW YORK: Bentkowski Brings New Appeal to N.Y. Appellate Division
-----------------------------------------------------------------
An appellate case captioned Robert Bentkowski, et al. vs. The City
of New York, et al., Case No. 23-04716, has been filed in the First
Judicial Department of the New York Appellate Division, on
September 20, 2023.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, ROBERT
BENTKOWSKI, et al. appealed a permanent injunction
ruling entered
by the Hon. Lyle E. Frank in their lawsuit entitled
Robert
Bentkowski, et al., individually and on behalf of all
others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. The City of New York,
et al.,
Defendants, Case No. 154962/2023, in the Supreme Court of
the State
of New York, New York County.
That appellate case was filed on August 11, 2023, and captioned
Robert Bentkowski, et al. vs. The
City of New York, et al., Case
No. 23-04103, in the New York
Appellate Division's First Judicial
Department.
Previously, Bentkowski, et al., brought this action
pursuant
to
Article 78, to annul the Defendants' implementation of a new
healthcare plan for City retirees. The Plaintiffs alleged that
the
City has unlawfully tried to divest Medicare-eligible
retirees and
their dependents of promised healthcare benefits by
attempting to
switch the retirees from their existing healthcare
plans to an
inferior plan, the Aetna Medicaid Advantage
Plan.
The Plaintiffs moved for a preliminary injunction enjoining the
City from forcing retirees to switch from their existing
healthcare
benefits, and from being required to either enroll
in an Aetna
Medicare Advantage Plan or seek their own health
coverage. The
City
opposed the application.
On June 5, 2023, the Court issued a preliminary injunction in
this
matter.
The Defendants were temporarily enjoined until
further order of the
Court from
requiring any City retirees,
and their dependents from being
removed from their current health
insurance plan(s), and from
being
required to either enroll
in an Aetna Medicare Advantage Plan or
seek their own health
coverage.
On August 11, 2023, Judge Frank held that the Court has
been
informed by
the parties that they do not wish for the
Court to hold any
additional argument, nor will there be further
submissions. As
such, the matter is ripe for a final
determination.
Accordingly, the Court granted the petition
for the reasons
indicated on July 6, 2023, namely that both the
doctrine of
collateral estoppel and the provisions of New York
City
Administrative Code Section 12-126 bars the actions sought
to be
taken by the Defendants. The Court does not reach the last
point of
relief in the petition, namely that the Defendants
should be
en joined from disseminating alleged false and
misleading statements
of the Aetna Medicare Advantage Plan.
"[T]he Respondents are permanently enjoined from requiring any
City
retirees, and their dependents from being removed from
their
current health insurance plan(s), and from being required
to either
enroll in an Aetna Medicare Advantage Plan or seek
their own health
coverage," Judge Frank wrote in his 2-page
ruling.
[BN]
Defendants-Respondents THE CITY OF NEW YORK, et al. are represented
by:
Jonathan Daniel Schoepp-Wong, Esq.
100 Church St.
New York, NY 10007
Telephone: (212) 356-2275
PEOPLES BANK: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Barefoot Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------
CHERYL BAREFOOT, individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PEOPLES BANK f/k/a LIMESTONE BANK,
Defendant, Case No. 2:23-cv-03161-SDM-KAJ (S.D. Ohio., Sept. 27,
2023) is a class action against the Defendant for its failure to
properly secure and safeguard the Plaintiff's and other similarly
situated Defendant customers' sensitive information, including full
names, Social Security numbers, and financial account numbers.
According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, by obtaining,
collecting, using, and deriving a benefit from the PII of Plaintiff
and Class Members, Defendant assumed legal and equitable duties to
those individuals to protect and safeguard that information from
unauthorized access and intrusion.
The Defendant failed to adequately protect the Plaintiff's and
Class Members PII, and failed to even encrypt or redact this highly
sensitive information. This unencrypted, unredacted PII was
compromised due to Defendant's negligent and careless acts and
omissions and their utter failure to protect customers' sensitive
data. Hackers targeted and obtained the Plaintiff's and Class
Members' PII because of its value in exploiting and stealing the
identities of Plaintiff and Class Members. The present and
continuing risk to victims of the Data Breach will remain for their
respective lifetimes, says the suit.
PEOPLES BANK f/k/a LIMESTONE BANK provides banking services. The
Company offers checking and saving accounts, lines of credit,
credit and debit cards, online banking, agricultural lending, and
treasury management services. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Terence R. Coates, Esq.
MARKOVITS, STOCK & DEMARCO, LLC
119 East Court Street, Suite 530
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Telephone: (513) 651-3700
Facsimile: (513) 665-0219
Email: tcoates@msdlegal.com
- and -
David K. Lietz, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, LLC
5335 Wisconsin Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20015-2052
Telephone: (866) 252-0878
Facsimile: (202) 686-2877
Email: dlietz@milberg.com
PROGRESS SOFTWARE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Brida Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------------
DAWN M. BRIDA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PROGRESS SOFTWARE CORPORATION; THE
MASSACHUSETTS EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES; and
THE UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS CHAN MEDICAL SCHOOL FOUNDATION,
INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-12202-NMG (D. Mass., Sept. 26,
2023) is a class action against the Defendants for their failure to
properly secure and safeguard personally identifiable information
and private health information.
According to the complaint, despite its duties to Plaintiff and
Class Members related to and arising from its cloud hosting and
secure file transfer services and applications involving MOVEit,
the Defendants stored, maintained, and hosted the Plaintiff's and
Class Members' Private Information on its MOVEit transfer services
software that was negligently and recklessly configured and
maintained so as to contain security vulnerabilities that resulted
in multiple breaches of its network and systems or of its
customers' networks and systems, including UMass Chan's networks
and systems.
These security vulnerabilities existed as far back as 2021. As a
result of the breach, unauthorized third- party cybercriminals
gained access to and obtained Plaintiff's and Class Members'
Personal Information, says the suit.
As a result of the Defendants' alleged unreasonable and inadequate
data security practices that resulted in the Data Breach, Plaintiff
and Class Members are at a current and ongoing risk of identity
theft and have suffered numerous actual and concrete injuries and
damages.
PROGRESS SOFTWARE CORPORATION develops, markets, and distributes
applications. The Company offers databases, application, messaging
servers, and development tools. Progress Software serves customers
in the United States. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kristen A. Johnson
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO
1 Faneuil Hall Square, 5th Floor
Boston, MA 02109
Telephone: (617) 482-3700
Facsimile: (617) 482-3003
Email: kristenj@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Steve W. Berman, Esq.
Sean R. Matt, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO
1301 Second Avenue, Suite 2000
Seattle, WA 98101
Telephone: (206) 623-7292
Facsimile: (206) 623-0594
Email: steve@hbsslaw.com
sean@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Jeffrey S. Goldenberg, Esq.
Todd R. Naylor, Esq.
GOLDENBERG SCHNEIDER, LPA
4445 Lake Forest Drive, Suite 490
Cincinnati, OH 45242
Telephone: (513) 345-8291
Facsimile: (513) 345-8294
Email: jgoldenberg@gs-legal.com
- and -
Charles Schaffer, Esq.
Nicholas J. Elia, Esq.
LEVIN SEDRAN & BERMAN LLP
510 Walnut Street, Suite 500
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Telephone: (215) 592-1500
Facsimile: (215) 592-4663
Email: cschaffer@lfsblaw.com
nelia@lfsblaw.com
- and -
Joseph M. Lyon, Esq.
THE LYON FIRM
2754 Erie Ave.
Cincinnati, OH 45208
Telephone: (513) 381-2333
Facsimile: (513) 766-9011
Email: jlyon@thelyonfirm.com
REPUBLIC OF SUDAN: Appeals Dismissal Bid Ruling in O'Neill Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
REPUBLIC OF THE SUDAN, et al. are taking an appeal from a court
order entered in the lawsuit entitled C.I. O'Neill, as the Personal
Representative and individually as surviving spouse of John P.
O'Neill, Sr., and of the Estate of John P. O'Neill, Sr., deceased,
and on behalf of all survivors and all legally entitled
beneficiaries and family members of John P. O'Neill, Sr.; as well
as the Personal Representative of the Estate of D. A. O'Neill, the
late parent of John P. O'Neill, Sr.; on behalf of themselves and
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Republic of the
Sudan, et al., Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-12114, in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit
seeks punitive damages, prejudgment and post-judgment interest, and
such other and further relief under the Foreign Sovereign
Immunities Act. The Plaintiffs claim that Sudan has supported,
encouraged, sponsored, aided, abetted, conspired with a variety of
groups that provided financing, training, safe-haven, paramilitary
training, indoctrination, money, travel documentation, safe
passage, and refuge in the Sudan, as well as weapons, for terrorist
groups, including al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden.
On Feb. 3, 2020, the Republic of Sudan filed a motion to dismiss
for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction.
On Aug. 10, 2023, Judge George B. Daniels adopted a report and
recommendation entered by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn in part by
denying Sudan's motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter
jurisdiction and finding that the Court has jurisdiction over the
claims against Sudan. The Court held that the Plaintiffs have
sufficiently pled their 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1605A(c) and (d),
Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) primary liability, and civil Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) claims. The
Plaintiffs have also sufficiently pled state law trespass claims,
and Ashton and Burnett Plaintiffs have sufficiently pled state law
assault and battery claims. The Court also adopted the Report by
granting Sudan's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim as
to the (1) Plaintiffs' state law claims for punitive damages,
conspiracy, aiding and abetting, intentional infliction of
emotional distress, negligence, and assault and battery brought
after September 11, 2002; and (2) Plaintiffs' international law
claims. The Court declined to adopt the Report regarding the
Plaintiffs' Alien Tort Statute (ATS) claims and secondary liability
ATA claims, hereby granting Sudan's motion to dismiss for failure
to state a claim as to Plaintiffs' ATS claims and ATA
aiding-and-abetting and conspiracy claims. Moreover, the Court
directed the Clerk of Court to vacate Certificates of Default and
the associated Certificate dated September 9, 2005 for Federal
Insurance Company.
The appellate case is captioned O'Neill v. Republic of the Sudan,
Case No. 23-1300, in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Second Circuit, filed on September 20, 2023. [BN]
Plaintiffs-Appellees C.I. O'NEILL, as the Personal Representative
and individually as surviving spouse of John P. O'Neill, Sr., and
of the Estate of John P. O'Neill, Sr., deceased, and on behalf of
all survivors and all legally entitled beneficiaries and family
members of John P. O'Neill, Sr.; as well as the Personal
Representative of the Estate of D. A. O'Neill, the late parent of
John P. O'Neill, Sr.; on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated, are represented by:
Alexander Greene, Esq.
ANDERSON KILL, P.C.
1251 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10020
Telephone: (212) 278-1053
Defendants-Appellants REPUBLIC OF THE SUDAN, et al., are
represented by:
Christopher M. Curran, Esq.
WHITE & CASE LLP
701 13th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 626-3643
S.R.Y. FOOD: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Cabrera Suit Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------
FLOR ESTRADA CABRERA, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. S.R.Y. FOOD CORP. d/b/a KEY FOOD
FRESH SUPERMARKET; and JRI FOOD CORP. d/b/a KEY FOOD FRESH
SUPERMARKET; SHIHADEH MUSLEH; RAID AHMAD; JOSE DIAZ; and EVELYN
DIAZ, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-07174 (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 27, 2023)
seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime
compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and
costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Plaintiff Cabrera was employed by the Defendants as a helper.
KEY FOOD FRESH SUPERMARKET is a grocery store providing variety of
merchandise. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Roman Avshalumov, Esq.
HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, PC
80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601
Kew Gardens, NY 11415
Telephone: (718) 263-9591
Facsimile: (718) 263-9598
SAUDI ARABIA: Sudan Files 2nd Cir. Appeal in O'Neill Suit
----------------------------------------------------------
The Republic of the Sudan has filed an appeal in the lawsuit
captioned Estate of John P. O'Neill, Sr., on behalf of John P.
O'Neill, Sr., deceased, and on behalf of decedent's heirs-at-law,
et al.; on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, v. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, et al., Defendants, Case
No. 04-cv-1922, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit is
brought against the Defendants by the Plaintiffs on behalf of the
family members of victims of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks seeking to
hold Saudi Arabia and others, including the Republic of Sudan,
liable for assisting the hijackers.
On Feb. 3, 2020, the Republic of Sudan filed a motion to dismiss
for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and personal jurisdiction.
On Aug. 10, 2023, Judge George B. Daniels adopted report and
recommendation entered by Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn in part by
denying Sudan's motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter
jurisdiction and finding that the Court has jurisdiction over the
claims against Sudan. The court held that the Plaintiffs have
sufficiently pled their 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1605A(c) and (d),
Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) primary liability, and civil Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) claims. The
Plaintiffs have also sufficiently pled state law trespass claims,
and Ashton and Burnett Plaintiffs have sufficiently pled state law
assault and battery claims. The Court also adopted the Report by
granting Sudan's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim as
to the (1) Plaintiffs' state law claims for punitive damages,
conspiracy, aiding and abetting, intentional infliction of
emotional distress, negligence, and assault and battery brought
after September 11, 2002; and (2) Plaintiffs' international law
claims. The Court declined to adopt the Report regarding the
Plaintiffs' Alien Tort Statute (ATS) claims and secondary liability
ATA claims, but granting Sudan's motion to dismiss for failure to
state a claim as to Plaintiffs' ATS claims and ATA
aiding-and-abetting and conspiracy claims. Moreover, the Court
directed the Clerk of Court to vacate Certificates of Default and
the associated Certificate dated September 9, 2005 for Federal
Insurance Company.
The appellate case is captioned Estate of John P. O'Neill, Sr. v.
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Case No. 23-1294, in the United States
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, filed on September 20,
2023. [BN]
Plaintiffs-Appellees ESTATE OF JOHN P. O'NEILL, SR., on behalf of
John P. O'Neill, Sr., deceased, and on behalf of decedent's
heirs-at-law, et al.; on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated, are represented by:
Ethan W. Middlebrooks, Esq.
ANDERSON KILL, P.C.
1251 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10020
Telephone: (212) 278-1324
Defendants-Appellants KINGDOM OF SAUDI ARABIA, et al., are
represented by:
Christopher M. Curran, Esq.
WHITE & CASE LLP
701 13th Street, NW
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 626-3643
SELENE FINANCE: Argona Suit Removed to S.D. Florida
---------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Sally Argona, Katrina Martin, individually and
on behalf of others similarly situated v. Selene Finance, LP, was
removed to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
Florida on Sept. 27, 2023.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:23-cv-14297-XXXX to
the proceeding.
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.
Selene Finance, LP -- https://www.selenefinance.com/ -- operates as
a residential mortgage company. The Company offers all aspects of
mortgage loan.[BN]
The Plaintiffs appear pro se.
The Defendant is represented by:
Sara Drennen Dunn, Esq.
BRADLEY ARANT BOULT CUMMING LLP
100 North Tampa Street, Suite 2200
Tampa, FL 33602
Phone: (813) 559-5500
Email: saccardi@bradley.com
SIEMENS INDUSTRY: Court Grants Transfer of FLSA Suit to C.D. Cal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ufonobong Umanah of Bloomberg Law reports that Siemens Industry
Inc. succeeded in transferring a proposed Fair Labor Standards Act
class action to the US District Court for the Central District of
California.
Siemens has an office in Orange County where the plaintiffs were
employed and where a substantial part of the acts giving rise to
the complaint occurred, so Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley ruled the
case should be transferred from the Northern District of California
on September 25, 2023.
Chanielle Enomoto and Brandon Johnson alleged that Siemens
misclassified them and others as exempt employees, which led to a
systematic failure to pay proper wages and provide meal. [GN]
SMG FOOD AND BEVERAGE: Ordono Suit Removed to N.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as John Ordono, individually and on behalf of
all other similarly situated v. SMG FOOD AND BEVERAGE LLC D/B/A THE
MOSCONE CENTER A/K/A SAVOR, and SMG HOLDINGS LLC D/B/A THE MOSCONE
CENTER A/K/A SAVOR, Case No. CGC-23-607169 was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San
Francisco, to the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California on Sept. 29, 2023, and assigned Case No.
3:23-cv-05019.
The Class Action Complaint alleges one cause of action against
Defendants for failure to remit gratuities in violation of
California Labor Code, and Business and Professions Code.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Steven M. Kroll, Bar No. 216196
BENT CARYL & KROLL, LLP
6300 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1415
Los Angeles, CA 90048
Phone: (323) 315-0510
Facsimile: (323) 774-6021
STANLEY STEAMER: Espinal Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Stanley Steamer
International, Inc. The case is styled as Frangie Espinal, on
behalf of herself and all other persons similarly situated v.
Stanley Steamer International, Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-08578
(S.D.N.Y., Sept. 29, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Stanley Steemer -- https://www.stanleysteemer.com/ -- provides the
best floor cleaning services like carpet cleaning, hardwood floor
cleaning, tile and grout cleaning, area rug cleaning and more.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dana Lauren Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 E. 18th St., Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Phone: (212) 228-9795
Fax: (212) 982-6284
Email: danalgottlieb@aol.com
STREMICKS HERITAGE: Johnson Suit Removed to C.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Donald Leon Johnson, individually, and on
behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. STREMICKS
HERITAGE FOODS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and DOES
1-50, inclusive, Case No. 30-2023-01337605-CU-OE-CXC was removed
from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County
of Orange, to the United States District Court for the Central
District of California on Sept. 29, 2023, and assigned Case No.
8:23-cv-01853-KES.
In the complaint, the Plaintiff alleged against the Defendants'
Meal Period Violations, Rest Period Violations, Wage Statement
Violations, and Failure to Timely Pay Wages Upon Termination of
Employment.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Evan R. Moses, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
400 South Hope Street, Suite 1200
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Phone: 213-239-9800
Facsimile: 213-239-9045
Email: evan.moses@ogletree.com
- and -
Eric E. Suits, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
500 Capitol Mall, Suite 2500
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-840-3150
Facsimile: 916-840-3159
Email: Eric.suits@ogletree.com
TESLA INC: Mata Files Suit in N.D. California
---------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Tesla, Inc. The case
is styled as Tony Mata, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated v. Tesla, Inc. doing business as: Tesla Motors,
Inc., Case No. 4:23-cv-04626-KAW (N.D. Cal., Sept. 8, 2023).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Tort/Non-Motor
Vehicle.
Tesla, Inc. -- https://www.tesla.com/ -- is an American
multinational automotive and clean energy company headquartered in
Austin, Texas.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Craig Shunji Momita, Esq.
Michael Anthony Jenkins, Esq.
Mickel Arias, Esq.
ARIAS SANGUINETTI WANG & TORRIJOS, LLP
6701 Center Drive West, Suite 1400
Los Angeles, CA 90045
Phone: (310) 844-9696
Fax: (310) 861-0168
Email: craig@asstlawyers.com
anthony@aswtlawyers.com
mike@aswtlawyers.com
TIDAL FOODS: Bullock Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Tidal Foods, Inc., et
al. The case is styled as Justin Bullock, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated v. Tidal Foods, Inc., Tidal Foods,
PBC, Case No. 1:23-cv-08580-JPC (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 29, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Tidal Foods doing business as 12 Tides -- https://12tides.com/ --
is an online food store that offers a wide range of sea salt, chili
pepper, and everything-chips products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dan Shaked, Esq.
SHAKED LAW GROUP, P.C.
14 Harwood Court, Suite 415
Scarsdale, NY 10583
Phone: (917) 373-9128
Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com
TORONTO, ON: Court Certifies Class Suit Over Brokerage Commissions
------------------------------------------------------------------
Zoe Demarco of Storeys reports that a Federal Court has ruled that
a proposed class action lawsuit against a number of prominent
Toronto real estate brokerages and associations can move ahead.
The Toronto Regional Real Estate Board (TRREB), the Canadian Real
Estate Association (CREA), and seven major brokerages, including
Royal LePage Real Estate Services, Right at Home Realty, and Forest
Hill Real Estate, are named as defendants.
The case alleges that the real estate agencies entered into an
"illegal arrangement" to inflate buyer brokerage commissions paid
by sellers across the Greater Toronto Area, and that TRREB and CREA
"aided and abetted" the scheme.
The lawsuit stems from rules that brokerages agree to when they
join TRREB and CREA, including that a seller on the Toronto MLS
system must pay a commission to their own brokerage as well as that
of the buyer, typically of 2.5% to each firm.
The Statement of Claim, brought forth by Toronto resident Mark
Sunderland, argues that the rules "severely limit and impair the
negotiation or alteration of the price" of buyer brokerage
commissions.
The defendants, which include Chestnut Park Real Estate and Harvey
Kalles Real Estate, had asked the court to strike the claim, but a
judge found that it was "at least arguable" that the rules impose
illegal controls on the price of such commissions.
"Housing in the GTA has become unaffordable. Part of the reason is
the real estate industry itself, whose rules impose additional cost
on real estate sellers," Garth Myers, a lawyer for Sunderland, said
in a release. "This industry needs to change to get onside Canada's
laws. Sellers should not be paying for buyers' realty services. If
this case is successful, it will have industry-wide ramifications,
decreasing the cost of housing for everyone."
The proposed class action is seeking to represent every person who
has sold a residential property through the Toronto MLS system
since March 11, 2010.
When contacted by STOREYS, spokespeople for TRREB and Royal LePage
declined to comment on matters that are before the courts. Other
defendants, including Max Wright Real Estate and iPro Realty, had
not responded to requests for comment at the time of publication.
"As this matter is still before the courts, we continue to believe
the claims against TRREB, CREA, and other defendants are without
merit and we will continue to defend our members in this case,"
Pierre Leduc, a spokesperson for CREA, told STOREYS. [GN]
TRI COUNTIES BANK: Wilson Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------------
Olga V. Wilson, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated
v. TRI COUNTIES BANK; and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, Case No.
23CV02511 (Cal. Super. Ct., Butte Cty., Sept. 8, 2023), is brought
seeking unpaid wages and interest thereon for failure to pay wages
for all hours worked at minimum wage and all overtime hours
worked.
The Defendant failure to pay wages for all hours worked at minimum
wage and all overtime hours worked; failure to authorize or permit
all legally required and/or compliant meal periods or pay meal
period premium wages; failure to authorize or permit all legally
required and/or compliant rest periods or pay rest period premium
wages; statutory penalties for failure to provide accurate wage
statements; statutory waiting time penalties in the form of
continuation wages for failure to timely pay employees all wages
due upon separation of employment; and claims for injunctive relief
and restitution under California Business and Professions Code,
says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as an hourly
non-exempt employee from January 2020 until December 2022 and June
28, 2023 until July 28, 2023.
TRI COUNTIES BANK is authorized to do business within the State of
California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph Lavi, Esq.
Vincent C. Granberry, Esq.
Elizabeth L. Harrier, Esq.
LAVI & EBRAHIMIAN, LLP
8889 W. Olympic Boulevard, Suite 200
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
Phone: (310) 432-0000
Facsimile: (310) 432-0001
Email: jlavi@lelawfirm.com
vgranberry@lelawfirm.com
eharrier@lelawfirm.com
WHT3@lelawfirm.com
UNITED HEALTHCARE: Abramowitz Files Suit in D. Minnesota
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against United HealthCare
Services, Inc. The case is styled as Kelly Abramowitz, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. United HealthCare
Services, Inc. doing business as: UnitedHealthcare Student
Resources, Case No. 0:23-cv-02713-JRT-DJF (D. Minn., Sept. 5,
2023).
The nature of suit is stated as Fraud for Breach of Contract.
United Healthcare Services, Inc. -- https://www.uhc.com/ -- was
founded in 1974. The company's line of business includes providing
hospital, medical, and other health services to subscribers or
members.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Nathaniel James Weimer, Esq.
TEWKSBURY & KERFELD, P.A.
88 South Tenth St., Ste. 300
Minneapolis, MN 55403
Phone: (612) 334-3399
Email: nweimer@tkz.com
UNITED STATES: Faces Class Suit Over Legal Use of Medical Marijuana
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Kelly Mehorter of ClassAction.org reports that a proposed class
action claims the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) and its secretary, Marcia Fudge, "irrationally" refuse
housing to low-income residents legally using medical marijuana
under state law.
The 44-page lawsuit explains that the HUD's Housing Choice Voucher
Program, commonly referred to as "Section 8" housing, is the
largest federal housing assistance program open to families who,
among other eligibility requirements, qualify as being "very low"
or "extremely low" income.
However, the case shares, otherwise eligible individuals who
legally use medical marijuana under state law are denied admittance
to the Section 8 Housing Program based on the drug's status as a
Schedule I substance under the Controlled Substance Act (CSA).
Under the CSA, a Schedule I substance "(i) has a high potential for
abuse, (ii) has no accepted medical use, and (iii) cannot be used
safely even under medical supervision," the filing relays.
But, since passing the CSA in 1970, the federal government has
acknowledged that state-legal medical marijuana has a "zero
likelihood" of fatal abuse, can offer effective medical benefits
and can be safely used under medical supervision overseen by the
states, the complaint states. This leaves the HUD with "no rational
basis" for its "misapplied enforcement" of the CSA to discriminate
against lawful medical marijuana users seeking housing, the case
contends.
"Much has changed since the CSA was passed over 50 years ago," the
complaint says. "On September 26, 2023, 44 states plus the District
of Columbia and certain U.S. Territories have legalized medical
marijuana for medical use and 22 states have legalized it for adult
use."
In spite of the substance's Schedule I classification, the U.S.
Drug Enforcement Administration reports that there has yet to be a
single documented death from an overdose of marijuana, the case
relays.
What's more, U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy stated in 2015 that
there is "preliminary data showing that for certain medical
conditions and symptoms that marijuana can be helpful," the filing
says. Per the complaint, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has
since approved several THC-based medications such as Epidiolex, a
pharmaceutical-grade, marijuana-based cannabidiol (CBD) extract
used to treat children suffering from Dravet and Lennox-Gastaut
syndromes.
Additionally, since at least 2009, the U.S. Department of Justice
has issued several written policies limiting its enforcement of
federal drug laws concerning the production, sale and use of
medical marijuana when done so in compliance with the state's
marijuana laws, the suit notes.
According to the filing, these memorandums highlight "the federal
government's conviction that marijuana can be used safely under
medical supervision when that usage is overseen by state law
enforcement and regulatory bodies."
One of the plaintiffs, a low-income, 65-year-old veteran residing
in Indiana County, Pennsylvania, says her application for the
Section 8 Housing Program was denied in 2023 based solely on her
voluntary disclosure that she lawfully uses medical marijuana under
the state's Medical Marijuana (MMJ) Act to treat her chronic pain
and post-traumatic stress disorder.
The plaintiff says that after Pennsylvania's MMJ Act was passed in
2016, she switched from opioids to medical marijuana to help
alleviate her ailments. As the case tells it, the HUD does not
discriminate against opioid users due to the substance's status as
a Schedule II and/or Schedule III drug under the CSA, despite there
being more than 45 opioid overdose deaths each day in the U.S.
"The result of this discrimination produces a bizarre result where
someone using opioids may obtain federally assisted housing, but an
individual choosing to escape the highly addictive character of
opioids by using marijuana may not," the suit stresses.
The lawsuit looks to represent any Section 8 Housing Program
applicants who legally use or used medical marijuana under
Pennsylvania law and were denied admission into the federal housing
assistance program. [GN]
UNIVERSITY HEALTH: Suit Removed to E.D. Tennessee
-------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as John Doe, Individually, and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. UNIVERSITY HEALTH SYSTEM, INC. D/B/A
THE UNIVERSITY OF TENNESSEE MEDICAL CENTER, Case No. 207369-2 was
removed from the Chancery Court for the Sixth Judicial District,
Knox County, Tennessee, to the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Tennessee on Sept. 29, 2023, and assigned Case
No. 3:23-cv-00357.
The underlying factual basis for Doe's Complaint is that Defendant
allegedly violated Tennessee law by embedding certain third-party
source codes--called the Meta Pixel--onto Defendant's publicly
available websites, referred to in the Complaint as the "Website"
and "Online Platforms." Doe further alleges that Defendant violated
Tennessee law by installing other tracking technology--such as the
Google Tag Manager, Google Analytics, LinkedIn, The Trade Desk,
DoubleClick, and Sipli.fi--on its website. Based on these alleged
facts, Doe's Complaint contains eight counts against Defendant
under Tennessee law: negligence, negligence per se, invasion of
privacy intrusion upon seclusion, breach of implied contract,
unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty, violation of the
Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, and violation of Tennessee Code
Annotated.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
Andrew E. Mize, Esq.
STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
The Freedom Center
223 Rosa L. Parks. Ave., Suite 200
Nashville, TN 37203
Phone: (615) 254 - 8801
Facsimile: (615) 225 - 5419
Email: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
amize@stranchlaw.com
- and -
Lynn A Toops, Esq.
Mary Kate Dugan, Esq.
COHEN & MALAD, LLP
One Indiana Square, Suite 1400
Indianapolis, IN 46205
Phone: (317) 636-6481
Email: ltroops@cohenandmalad.com
mdugan@cohenandmalad.com
- and -
Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
Raina Borelli, Esq.
TURKE & STRAUSS, LLP
613 Williamson St., Suite 201
Madison, WI 53703
Phone: (608) 237-1775
Facsimile: (608) 509-4423
Email: sam@turkestrauss.com
raina@turkestrauss.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Samuel L. Felker, Esq.
Ryan Loofbourrow, Esq.
BAKER, DONELSON, BEARMAN, CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ, P.C.
1600 W End Ave Ste 2000
Nashville, TN 37203
Phone: 615-726-5558
Email: samfelker@bakerdonelson.com
rloofbourrow@bakerdonelson.com
- and -
Nicholas W. Diegel, Esq.
265 Brookview Centre Way # 600
Knoxville, TN 37919
Phone: 865-971-5108
Email: ndiegel@bakerdonelson.com
- and -
Paul G. Karlsgodt, Esq.
BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
1801 California Street, Ste. 4400
Denver, CO 80202
Phone: (303) 861-0600
Facsimile: (303) 861-7805
Email: pkarlsgodt@bakerlaw.com
- and -
John P. Hutchins, Esq.
Georgia L. Bennett, Esq.
BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
1170 Peachtree Street, NE, Suite 2400
Atlanta, GA 30309
Phone: 404.459.0050
Fax: 404.459.5734
Email: jhutchins@bakerlaw.com
gbennett@bakerlaw.com
US BANK NATIONAL: Frazier Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against US Bank National
Association. The case is styled as Alien Frazier, on behalf of
himself and others similarly situated v. US Bank National
Association, Case No. 23CV042876 (Cal. Super. Ct., Alameda Cty.,
Sept. 6, 2023).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case."
US Bank -- https://www.usbank.com/index.html -- is the 5th largest
financial services holding company in the US.[BN]
VERIZON CONNECT: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Cansler Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
MARIANO CANSLER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. VERIZON CONNECT FLEET USA LLC, Defendant,
Case No. 23-21117-kmp (E.D. Wis., Sept. 26, 2023) seeks to recover
from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation,
interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the
Fair Labor Standards Act.
Plaintiff Cansler was employed by the Defendant as a sales
representative.
VERIZON CONNECT FLEET USA LLC operates as a telecommunications
company. The Company provides wire line voice, data services,
wireless, and internet services. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mitchell L. Feldman, Esq.
FELDMAN LEGAL GROUP
6916 W. Linebaugh Ave #101
Tampa, FL 33625
Telephone: (813) 639-9366
Facsimile: (813) 639-9376
Email: mfeldman@flandgatrialattorneys.com
WHALECO INC: Faces Class Suit Over Alleged Data Breach
------------------------------------------------------
Abraham Jewett of Top Class Actions reports that online marketplace
Temu allows widespread and systematic theft of its customers'
personally identifiable information, a new class action lawsuit
alleges.
Plaintiff Eric Hu claims Temu gains "short-term and fleeting
benefits" -- such as saving on the costs of compliance -- by
allegedly failing to comply with “reasonable security
standards” that would protect the personal data of its users.
Hu argues Temu's users are at "ongoing risk" of having their
personal information compromised due to the company’s alleged
"knowing violation of its obligations to abide by best practices
and industry standards in protecting customers' personal
information."
"Defendant's actions did not come close to meeting the standards of
commercially reasonable steps that should be taken to protect
customers' personal identifying information," the Temu class action
states.
Hu wants to represent a nationwide class and consumer fraud
multistate class of consumers who registered an account with Temu
at any time from July 2022 to the present day.
Better Business Bureau warns consumers that Temu collects 'all
kinds' of their data, says class action
Hu cites an alleged warning by consumer group the Better Business
Bureau (BBB) earlier this month in which they allegedly warned
consumers that Temu collects "all kinds" of information from its
users, including social media and banking info.
The BBB has accrued more than 900 complaints by consumers who
experienced unauthorized bank account withdrawals and credit card
purchases shortly after they began making purchases on Temu,
according to the Temu class action.
Hu claims Temu is guilty of unjust enrichment and trespass to
personal property/chattels, and of violating the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and
New York General Business Law.
The plaintiff is demanding a jury trial and requesting declaratory
and injunctive relief along with an award of actual, punitive, and
statutory damages for himself and all class members.
In another case involving Temu, the company filed a complaint
against Shein in July over claims the clothing company tried to
take Temu out of the marketplace through an alleged campaign of
threats, intimidation, and false infringement claims.
The plaintiff is represented by John Troy, Tiffany Troy, and Aaron
B. Schweitzer of Troy Law, PLLC, James Chung of Chung Law Firm,
P.C., and Spencer Sheehan of Sheehan & Associates, P.C.
The Temu data breach class action lawsuit is Hu v. Whaleco Inc.
d/b/a Temu, Case No. 1:23-cv-06962, in the U.S. District Court for
the Eastern District of New York. [GN]
WHIRLPOOL CORP: Faces Class Suit Over Defective Refrigerators
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kelly Mehorter of ClassAction.org reports that a proposed class
action alleges a defect can cause certain Whirlpool refrigerators
to stop cooling and run above safe food-storing temperatures.
The 43-page lawsuit filed late last week claims that although
Whirlpool Corporation has known for years that at least 56
different Whirlpool refrigerator models fail to keep food cold
enough, the company has continued to sell the products to
unsuspecting consumers without disclosing the alleged defect.
Instead, Whirlpool has misleadingly advertised the refrigerators as
"reliable" appliances that can cool themselves and maintain
customized temperatures, the filing says.
Be sure to scroll down to see the model numbers of Whirlpool
fridges mentioned in the lawsuit.
In particular, the refrigerators at issue come equipped with a
thermistor -- a sensor that sends a signal to the appliance's
control board when it detects temperature changes -- that can
become loose or fall off the clip holding it in place, the case
claims. Once the thermistor becomes loose or detached, the suit
says, a Whirlpool fridge will not sense the freezer temperature
properly.
The lawsuit explains that this can cause the appliance to create
"excessive" frost buildup, fail to properly defrost, and develop
refrigerant leaks. These issues ultimately reduce or eliminate the
unit's ability to cool itself, the filing summarizes.
The lawsuit charges that Whirlpool has "actively concealed" the
existence of the thermistor sensor clip defect and continues to
mispresent the "performance, durability, capability, and
reliability" of its refrigerators to induce consumers into
purchasing the products at substantially higher prices. In fact,
the suit says, many consumers would not have bought the appliances
at all had they known they would fail to properly cool their food.
Whirlpool's alleged knowledge of the cooling issues
Per the complaint, Whirlpool discovered or should have discovered
the cooling problem, namely through pre-release reviews and its
"extensive" pre-sale testing processes, before the refrigerators at
issue even hit the market. Since releasing the products, Whirlpool
Corporation has been made aware of the defect through the high
volume of maintenance and repair requests consumers have made in
connection with their refrigerators running too warm, the suit
says.
Moreover, the company actively monitors reviews Whirlpool
refrigerator owners post to its website and third-party forums,
many of which detail problems with the products properly cooling
food, the filing shares.
For example, a commenter on Whirlpool.com wrote that they were
forced to throw away over $400 worth of food after their
three-week-old Whirlpool refrigerator would not go below 43 degrees
-- three degrees higher than the temperature U.S. Food and Drug
Administration deems safe for storing perishables. Other consumers
have reported elsewhere that the freezer side of their appliances
could not maintain an adequate temperature and stopped making ice,
the filing relays.
According to the case, Whirlpool Corporation even admitted in a
September 2021 technical service pointer distributed to certain
service companies and technicians that the defect causes the
refrigerators to stop cooling.
The plaintiff, a New York resident, says she was completely unaware
of these issues when she bought a Whirlpool 36-inch-wide
side-by-side refrigerator nearly ten months after the defendant
quietly acknowledged that the product doesn't work as advertised.
Shortly after purchasing the fridge, both the refrigerator and
freezer portion of her appliance failed to maintain their proper
temperatures, and the water dispenser rapidly slowed down when
dispensing water, the case explains. The woman says she was forced
to pay $245 for a new appliance, went without a fridge for more
than a month, and lost approximately $730 worth of food.
Although the Whirlpool refrigerators at issue come with a one-year
warranty for "defects in materials or workmanship under normal home
use," the company has failed to provide an effective and lasting
remedy for these cooling issues pursuant to its express and implied
warranties, the suit contends.
Which Whirlpool refrigerators are affected by the alleged defect?
The complaint claims that the following Whirlpool refrigerator
models fail to properly cool due to a faulty thermistor sensor
clip:
ASI2175GRB;
ASI2575GRS;
KRSC700HPS01;
KRSF705HPS01;
MSS25C4MGZ;
WRS311SDHW;
WRS312SNHW;
WRS315SDHW;
WRS315SNHW;
WRS321SDHZ;
WRS325SDHZ;
WRS335SDHB;
WRS555SIHV;
WRS973CIHV01;
ASI2175GRS;
ASI2575GRW;
KRSC703HBS01;
MSS25C4MGB;
WRS311SDHB;
WRS311SDHZ;
WRS315SDHB;
WRS315SDHZ;
WRS321SDHB;
WRS325SDHB;
WRS331SDHB;
WRS335SDHM;
WRS555SIHW;
973CIHZ01;
ASI2175GRW;
IRS335SDHM;
KRSC703HPS01;
MSS25C4MGK;
MRS311SDHM;
WRS312SNHB;
WRS315SDHM;
WRS315SNHB;
WRS321SDHV;
WRS325SDHV;
WRS331SDHM;
WRS335SDHW;
WRS555SIHZ;
WRSA15SNHN;
ASI2575GRB;
KRSC700HBS01;
KRSF705HBS01;
MSS25C4MGW;
WRS311SDHT;
WRS312SNHM;
WRS315SDHT;
WRS315SNHM;
WRS312SDHW;
WRS325SDHW;
WRS331SDHW;
WRS555SIHB;
WRS970CIHZ01; and
WRSA15SNHZ.
Who's covered by the lawsuit?
The suit seeks to represent anyone in the United States who
purchased any of the above-listed Whirlpool refrigerators.
How do I join the lawsuit?
There's usually nothing you need to do to join or be included in a
proposed class action lawsuit when it's first filed. If and when
the lawsuit settles, those who have been affected, i.e., the "class
members," should receive a direct notice of the settlement and
details about what to do next.[GN]
WISCONSIN: Court Denies Class Status in Suit Over Legal Defenders
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Sarah Lehr of Wisconsin Public Radio reports that a Brown County
judge has denied a request for class action status in a lawsuit
over low-income Wisconsinites who've faced long waits for legal
representation.
The Wisconsin Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, or WACDL,
sued on behalf of eight people, who had faced wait times for public
defenders ranging from over a month to nearly a year by the time
the suit was filed in August 2022.
The suit alleges that most of those people were forced to
"languish" in local jails while they waited for legal
representation, which hurt their careers and families, and violated
their rights under the U.S. and Wisconsin constitutions.
The plaintiffs argued any current or future Wisconsinite who waits
more than two weeks for a public defender from the time of their
first court appearance should be allowed to join the suit. Circuit
Court Judge Thomas Walsh, however, denied that request for class
action status in his recent ruling.
"We appreciate the court's recognition (of) the significant harms
that arise when counsel is not promptly assigned," said Lisa Wayne,
who leads the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers,
which joined the WACDL in helping to bring the suit. "We are
certainly disappointed that the court has not certified the class
this time, but look forward to continuing to litigate the case."
Walsh also quashed a motion from the state which sought to have the
suit thrown out, though he agreed to dismiss Gov. Tony Evers as a
defendant.
Wisconsin's state public defender and its public defender board are
still named as defendants in the ongoing lawsuit.
Attorneys for the state tried to argue the plaintiff's claims are
irrelevant since they now have attorneys to represent them, but, in
declining to dismiss the case, Walsh wrote the issue was of "great
public importance."
"A broad reading of the Plaintiffs' amended complaint shows they
seek a declaration that the delays they experienced in receiving
appointed counsel are unreasonable and violate their right to
counsel," Walsh wrote. "The right to counsel is a fundamental
constitutional right."
Although the lawsuit points to a shortage of public defenders
across Wisconsin, the suit says the problem has been particularly
"acute" in Brown County, where two of the plaintiffs have been held
in jail.
In 2021, Brown County's Board of Supervisors passed a resolution
calling on the governor and legislators take action over criminal
case backlogs. At the time, there were approximately 350 defendants
in Brown County in need of representation from the state public
defender's office, including 17 people who "have been in custody
and sought representation for over 100 days," according to the
resolution.
Advocates have long attributed Wisconsin's difficulty with
recruiting and retaining public defenders to burnout from heavy
caseloads, as well to low wages compared to attorneys in the
private sector.
Raises for public defenders are part of the state's latest biennial
budget, which took effect July 1. That included bringing starting
wages for assistant public defenders up to $36 an hour. It also
included pay increases for private attorneys who agree to represent
low-income defendants when a state public defender is not available
or has a conflict of interest.
Adam Plotkin, a lobbyist for the Office of the State Public
Defender, declined to comment on the ongoing litigation, but said
the office is already seeing "some impact" from the new budget.
"The additional funding will not solve all issues overnight,
especially in rural parts of Wisconsin, but the early indications
are that it's having a positive impact," Plotkin wrote in an email.
There are 27 vacant attorney positions in the statewide office,
representing a vacancy rate of close to 8 percent, Plotkin said on
September 25, 2023. That compares to a vacancy rate of about 13
percent in early February.
Although Wayne called the recent pay increases "long overdue," she
said they are "not a panacea for the systemic problems that have
brought Wisconsin and many other states to this constitutional
crisis."
She added, "Our nation's over-reliance on the criminal legal system
to address social needs, combined with our underfunding,
overburdening and undervaluing the public defense function, have
brought our system to the brink of failure."
In 2019, a federal judge dismissed a similar lawsuit in U.S.
District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin over long wait
times for public defenders. Among other arguments, the Evers
administration contended the suit should be dismissed because it
was up to the Legislature rather than federal courts to reform
Wisconsin's public defense system. [GN]
Asbestos Litigation
ASBESTOS UPDATE: H.B. Fuller Defends Personal Injury Lawsuits
-------------------------------------------------------------
H.B. Fuller Company has been named as a defendant in lawsuits in
which plaintiffs have alleged injury due to products containing
asbestos manufactured more than 35 years ago, according to the
Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.
The Company states, "The plaintiffs generally bring these lawsuits
against multiple defendants and seek damages (both actual and
punitive) in very large amounts. In many cases, plaintiffs are
unable to demonstrate that they have suffered any compensable
injuries or that the injuries suffered were the result of exposure
to products manufactured by us. We are typically dismissed as a
defendant in such cases without payment. If the plaintiff presents
evidence indicating that compensable injury occurred as a result of
exposure to our products, the case is generally settled for an
amount that reflects the seriousness of the injury, the length,
intensity and character of exposure to products containing
asbestos, the number and solvency of other defendants in the case,
and the jurisdiction in which the case has been brought.
"A significant portion of the defense costs and settlements in
asbestos-related litigation is paid by third parties, including
indemnification pursuant to the provisions of a 1976 agreement
under which we acquired a business from a third party. Currently,
this third party is defending and paying settlement amounts, under
a reservation of rights, in most of the asbestos cases tendered to
the third party.
"In addition to the indemnification arrangements with third
parties, we have insurance policies that generally provide coverage
for asbestos liabilities, including defense costs. Historically,
insurers have paid a significant portion of our defense costs and
settlements in asbestos-related litigation. However, certain of our
insurers are insolvent. We have entered into cost-sharing
agreements with our insurers that provide for the allocation of
defense costs and settlements and judgments in asbestos-related
lawsuits. These agreements require, among other things, that we
fund a share of settlements and judgments allocable to years in
which the responsible insurer is insolvent."
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://tinyurl.com/3atkb32b
*********
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 2023. 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 ***