/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/231213.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Wednesday, December 13, 2023, Vol. 25, No. 249
Headlines
23ANDME INC: Ioffe Sues Over Inadequate Information Security
3M CO: City of Two Rivers Opts Out of PFAS Class Action
ACE CREW: Gonzalez Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
ALTA TERRA: Parents Mull Class Action Over Living Conditions
AMERISTAR STAFFING: Ilan Alleges TVPA and Labor Law Breaches
ANGLO AMERICAN: Faces Coal Related Class Action Lawsuit
ASHLEY FURNITURE: Dec. 23 Settlement Claims Filing Deadline Set
BANKERS TRUST: Faces Class Action Over "Crippling" Overdraft Fees
BLUEWATER HEALTH: Faces Class Action Following Ransomware Attack
CATASTROPHE RESPONSE: Collins Suit Seeks to Send Notice to Workers
CENGAGE LEARNING: Filing for Class Cert Bids Due Feb. 20, 2024
CENTIMARK CORP: Initial Approval of Class & PAGA Settlement Sought
CHEMOCENTRYX INC: Seeks to Seal Portions of Class Cert Opposition
CLEVELAND CLINIC: Fails to Provide Proper Wages, Garner Claims
CLOUDLAKE DERMATOLOGY: Martinez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
CLUB EXPLORIA: Files 7th Cir. Appeal in Moore TCPA Suit
COINBASE GLOBAL: Woody Appeals Order Compelling Arbitration
CONSOLIDATED EDISON: 122nd Street Alleges Improper Gas Rates
CRISTIANO RONALDO: Faces Class Action Over Binance NFT Promotion
CSX TRANSPORTATION: Faces Class Action Over Train Derailment
DAIFUKU NORTH: Shaw Labor Suit Seeks to Certify Class, Subclasses
DEL MONTE: More Time Bid for Briefing Schedule OK'd in Gatling-Lee
DENSO MANUFACTURING: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Barton Alleges
DISCOUNT TIRE: Stoddard Suit Seeks Notice to Collective Members
DOLLAR GENERAL: Edmonds Alleges Securities Law Violations
DSSV INC: Chalmers Suit Seeks FLSA Class Judicial Notice
DTE ELECTRIC: Hinson Seeks Proper Overtime Compensation
E.I. DUPONT: Final Approval of Class Settlement Sought in Camden
EDGEWELL PERSONAL: Class Cert Bid Hearing Extended to Mar. 28, 2024
FAMILY DOLLAR: Jan. 9, 2024 Settlement Claims Filing Deadline Set
FCA US: Faces Class Action Over Jeep Clutch Defects
FEVER LABS: Nuber Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Cal.
FIDELITY NATIONAL: Faces Consolidated Securities Suit
FISKER INC: Financial Reports Lack Info, Shareholder Suit Says
GENERAL AUTOMOBILE: Class Cert Expert Disclosures Due July 29, 2024
GENERAL FREIGHT: Suit Seeks to Resolve Dispute on Collective Notice
GENESIS HEALTH: Doe Alleges Disclosure of Personal, Health Info
GLOCK INC: Must Oppose Class Cert Bid by Feb. 23, 2024
GLOCK INC: Parties Seek More Time for Class Cert Briefing Schedule
GREEN OLIVE INC: Jimenez Alleges Several Labor Law Violations
HERITAGE VALLEY: Appeals Remand Ruling in Doe Wiretapping Suit
HOLLY RIDGE: Tenants File Health Hazard Class Action
INSTADOSE PHARMA: Feb. 14 Class Action Opt-Out Deadline Set
JANSSEN INC: Lawyer Suggests BC Opioid Suit Too Big to Certify
JPMORGAN CHASE: Faces Sylvain Suit Over FCCPA Violations
JUSTWATCH INC: Fuhrhop & Leslie Sue Over Disclosure of Private Info
KELLY SERVICES: Brown Labor Suit Removed to N.D. Cal.
LAKE COUNTY, IL: Settles Class Action Over Jail Conditions
LGI HOMES: McAlister Wage-and-Hour Suit Removed to D. Colo.
LIBERTY MUTUAL: Watts Sues Over Transportation Expenses Coverage
LOANDEPOT.COM LLC: Court Narrows Claims in Smith Suit
MARTIAN SALES: Kratom Power Contains Opioid Receptors, Suit Says
MARTINEZ REFINING: Faces Suit Over Coke Dusts' Health Effects
META PLATFORMS: Alpena School Joins Suit Over Addictive Platforms
MONTCLAIR CAR: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Galdamez Alleges
MULKAY CARDIOLOGY: Faces Doe Suit Over Unprotected Patients' Info
NATIONAL INSTRUMENTS: Lead Plaintiff Bid Deadline Set for Jan. 29
NEW HAMPSHIRE: Must Face Class Action Over Administration of CFI
NEWARK, NJ: Settles Police Cadets' Labor Class Action for $4MM
OMELAGAH INC: Lewis Labor Suit Removed to N.D. Cal.
PRIORITY WORKFORCE: Faces Tux Wage-and-Hour Suit in Calif.
PROGRESS SOFTWARE: Constantine Sues Over Unprotected Personal Info
PROVIDENCE HEALTH: Angulo Suit Seeks to Certify Three Classes
PROVIDENCE PUBLIC: Class Settlement in Parents Suit Gets Final Nod
RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES: Class Cert Depositions Stayed in Borozny
RCDC RESEARCH: Class Cert Discovery Extended to March 8, 2024
RCDC RESEARCH: Salazar Seeks More Time to Conduct Class Discovery
RECKITT BENCKISER: Vasseur Sues Over Mislabeled Essential Oils
REDFIN CORP: Settles Agents' Wage Class Action for $3MM
SAAB RESTAURANTS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages to Servers, Garcia Says
SHULMAN ROGERS: Zambali Alleges Illegal Apartment Rent Collection
SILICON VALLEY: Norwegian Fund to Co-Lead Securities Class Action
SONOCO PRODUCTS: Faces Dorriety Suit Over Unpaid Overtime
SPOKEO INC: Parties Seek to Extend Class Cert Briefing Schedule
TENASKA MARKETING: Faces Deutscher Suit Over Illegal Profiteering
TERRAFORM LABS: May Face Fraud Class Action in Singapore
THIRD COAST: Sharkco Seafood Sues Over Crude Oil Spill in La.
TOUFAYAN BAKERIES: Saitman Sues Over Mislabeled Bread Products
UNITED PARCEL: Wynn Labor Suit Removed to N.D. Cal.
UNITED SERVICES: Policyholders Sue Over Medical Claims Denial
UNIVERSITY OF OREGON: Female Student-Athletes Sue Over Sex Bias
VALLEY HEALTH: Appeals Remand Ruling in Doe Privacy Rights Suit
VITAL PHARMACEUTICALS: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Garcia Claims
WELLS FARGO: Employee Files Class Action Over Unpaid Overtime Pay
WEST COAST: Lopez Wage-and-Hour Suit Removed to E.D. Cal.
WORLD RUGBY: Players to Apply for Brain Injury Class Action
WORLDPAC INC: Anaya Wage-and-Hour Suit Removed to C.D. Cal.
[*] TCPA Class Action Filings Up 43% in October 2023
*********
23ANDME INC: Ioffe Sues Over Inadequate Information Security
------------------------------------------------------------
POLINA IOFFE, Plaintiff v. 23ANDME, INC., Defendant, Case No.
5:23-cv-06205-NC (N.D. Cal., November 30, 2023) is a class action
arising from the Defendant's failure to protect and safeguard its
customers' sensitive private information, asserting claims against
the Defendant for negligence, breach of implied contract, and for
violations of the California Unfair Competition Law, the California
Consumer Privacy Act, the California Consumer Records Act, the
California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, and the California
Confidentiality of Medical Information Act in connection with the
data breach.
On October 6, 2023, Defendant 23andMe, Inc. announced that hackers
had breached customer accounts on Defendant's website and accessed
customer profile information without the account user's
authorization. In addition, 23andMe failed to disclose when they
first discovered the breach, the approximate size of the breach,
the number of customers affected, whether the breach was ongoing,
and how long they were aware of this security vulnerability.
Plaintiff Ioffe was not informed by 23andMe that her account was
one of those whose private information was breached until October
24, more than two weeks after the initial data breach was reported,
the suit contends.
23andMe, Inc. is a biotechnology company which specializes in
consumer genetics and research. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert C. Schubert, Esq.
Willem F. Jonckheer, Esq.
Amber L. Schubert, Esq.
SCHUBERT JONCKHEER & KOLBE LLP
2001 Union St, Ste 200
San Francisco, CA 94123
Telephone: (415) 788-4220
Facsimile: (415) 788-0161
E-mail: rschubert@sjk.law
wjonckheer@sjk.law
aschubert@sjk.law
3M CO: City of Two Rivers Opts Out of PFAS Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------
Seehafenews.com reports that the city of Two Rivers has decided to
opt out of a class action lawsuit.
During their work session meeting on Monday (November 27th), the
council voted 7-1 to not get money from a settlement from two
companies, 3M, and Dupont.
The lawsuits stem from getting PFAS, also known as forever
chemicals, into drinking water and affects every US State.
City Manager Greg Buckley said there was too much risk.
"The main concern is that it's unknown what liabilities might be in
the future," he explained. "If you participate in the settlement it
essentially takes these two major corporations off the hook as far
as any future claims related to contamination of drinking water."
He called it a "tough decision" for the council because members
were going back and forth about what should be done.
Buckley says about $10.5 to $12 billion will be given out by the
companies, but there were just too many uncertainties, including
how much each municipality would get.
The Manitowoc Common Council also discussed the lawsuit, but we
have yet to receive word on if any decision was made.
Cities around Wisconsin that have also opted out include
Germantown, Steven's Point, Appleton, and Janesville, however
cities like Wausau opted in because of a 3M plant working in their
city. [GN]
ACE CREW: Gonzalez Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
-----------------------------------------------------
TEODULO GONZALEZ and GABIER RAMOS, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. THE ACE CREW BUILDERS
LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-08653 (E.D.N.Y., November 21,
2023) seeks to recover damages for egregious violations of the Fair
Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law arising from
Plaintiffs' employment at Defendant.
The Plaintiffs allege the Defendant's failure to pay overtime
wages, failure to provide with a written notice, and failure to
furnish with wage statements upon each payment of wages.
Plaintiffs Gonzalez and Ramos were employed by the Defendant from
July 6, 2023 until July 19, 2023, where their primary duties
include sheetrocking, while performing other miscellaneous duties.
The Ace Crew Builders LLC is a post frame building company.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Janelle J. Romero, Esq.
GEN ESQ LAW PLLC
515 Madison Avenue #8140
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (201) 503-7754
ALTA TERRA: Parents Mull Class Action Over Living Conditions
------------------------------------------------------------
Ethan Budowsky, writing for WCJB, reports that some parents say
they are considering legal action against a new Gainesville
apartment complex that can't seem to get their living conditions
straight.
"To anyone who is considering signing a lease at UFora," said Nancy
Kinnally, "don't do it."
Kinnally is one of many parents considering legal action against
UFora and their development company, Alta Terra.
She says if you do sign a lease, you will not be able to join a
possible class-action lawsuit against the apartment complex.
She and other parents claim UFora is requiring all potential
residents who sign a lease to also sign a waiver of
non-participation.
"It tells you that they know they are flaunting the law," said
Kinnally, "they know that they have been flaunting the law all
along, and they know that they will continue to flaunt the law."
Her daughter was promised a one-of-a-kind unit, but was placed in a
temporary unit because it is not complete.
"It would be totally illegal to charge us more for that unit
because of their failure to deliver the unit that we actually
leased," said Kinnally, "and yet they're telling us that is a
financial concession."
Kinnally's daughter and her roommates expressed safety concerns
because there were no blinds on their windows that face the
streets, and they caught construction workers watching a recent
Gator game through those windows.
"You can't have six girls living in a unit with no covering on the
windows when they're right on the street," said Kinnally. "You just
can't do that."
Another parent believes she is owed more than $5000 in rent credits
after her son terminated his lease.
"There are more than 100 people that ended up terminating their
lease," said Lori Wilson, "did not move into UFora and got the 600
dollars a week. There's five of us that didn't move in and had the
rent credit . . . and they haven't paid a dime to us.
"We had the money on the account -- the $600 a week," continued
Wilson. "But when they sent me that the other day, it was moved to
zero. So I think they fraudulently credited it back to themselves"
Wilson's son had a temporary lease at another complex -- and had to
make it permanent because move-in at UFora was so delayed.
"He wants to live at UFora because the location is close to his
classes and everything he does," said Wilson, "but he didn't want
to be on the hook for the theory lease because then he would have
two leases."
TV20 has tried numerous times to reach UFora and Alta Terra but
have yet to get a response.
"It's clear that we have been lied to," said Kinnally. [GN]
AMERISTAR STAFFING: Ilan Alleges TVPA and Labor Law Breaches
------------------------------------------------------------
ZESS MISTY C. ILAN, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. AMERISTAR STAFFING, INC., AHMED S. AHMED and
LAMIS YAHIA, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-08848 (E.D.N.Y., November
30, 2023) seeks for damages and injunctive relief for Defendants'
violations of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, the New York
Labor Law, and for a declaratory judgment that a $10,000 liquidated
damages penalty is unenforceable under the TVPA, the 13th Amendment
to the United States Constitution, New York statutory and common
law.
The class action arises out of Defendants' recruitment, provision
and/or obtaining of Plaintiff's labor or services through the use
of fraud and the threat of serious harm that resulted in the forced
labor and wage exploitation of the Plaintiff by Defendants.
Allegedly, the Defendants engaged and are engaging in a policy and
practice of paying their therapists less than the prevailing wages
that are required by federal immigration rules and regulations and
by not paying them all of their hours of work in violation of their
employment contracts and New York Labor Law. In addition, under
their meal period deduction policy, the Defendants required
Plaintiff and similarly-situated employees to clock out for a
30-minute meal period per work shift. As a result, there was an
automatic 30-minute uncompensated time during Plaintiff's work
shift, despite the fact that Plaintiff and similarly-situated
employees performed compensable work for Defendants during their
uncompensated meal periods, says the suit.
With its corporate office located at 107-02R Jamaica Avenue,
Richmond Hill, NY, Ameristar Staffing, Inc. provides staffing
solutions to various health care facilities in the state of New
York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Felix Q. Vinluan, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF FELIX VINLUAN
6910 Roosevelt Avenue, 2nd Floor
Woodside, NY 11377
Telephone: (718) 478-4488
E-mail: fqvinluan@yahoo.com
- and -
Jude T. Palces, Esq.
JUDE TADEO PALCES LAW
535 Lakeville Road
New Hyde Park, NY 11040
Telephone: (917) 816-0482
E-mail: jtpalces@gmail.com
ANGLO AMERICAN: Faces Coal Related Class Action Lawsuit
-------------------------------------------------------
Coal Age reports that a class action lawsuit has been filed against
nine companies owned by Anglo American Group. This is the second
class action lawsuit brought in South Africa by the law firm,
Richard Spoor Inc., which represents the coal miners. The first
case was filed in August against South32, BHP Billiton and Seriti.
The lawsuit is positioned as a recourse to current and former coal
miners, as well as dependents of deceased workers who contracted
coal mine dust lung disease (CMDLD) in the form of pneumoconiosis
and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) after exposure to
coal mine dust in mines.
"It's a process, but what we're hoping is to grab hold of those who
benefited from this neglect of miners and their families lives and
their health, and to hold them accountable in some measure,"
representing lawyer Richard Spoor said.
Motley Rice LLC, one of the largest plaintiffs' litigation firms in
the U.S., is acting as a consultant to the employees' legal
representatives. This lawsuit arises about five years following the
landmark class action agreement the two firms brokered for harmed
workers in the case of Nkala and Others. vs. Harmony Gold Mining
Co. Ltd. and others. In that particular case, gold miners and their
relatives received compensation for developing silicosis due to
work-related exposure to silica dust in gold mining operations.
"Motley Rice is honored to assist coal miners and their families in
their fight for justice in South Africa. Over the past 50 years,
our lawyers have fought for the rights of injured workers and
welcome the opportunity to share these experiences in South
Africa," said miners' legal team consultant Michael Elsner.[GN]
ASHLEY FURNITURE: Dec. 23 Settlement Claims Filing Deadline Set
---------------------------------------------------------------
Top Class Actions reports that you can submit a claim to 10 class
action lawsuit settlements in December in order to receive cash
payments! These settlements resolve claims of false advertising,
privacy violations, defective products and more.
Reynolds agreed to pay $3 million to resolve claims that it falsely
advertised Hefty and Great Value bags as made for "recycling,"
despite the fact that the bags cannot be recycled.
The settlement benefits shoppers who purchased Hefty and/or Great
Value recycling bags between July 20, 2018, and Aug. 30, 2023.
Plaintiffs in the false advertising class action lawsuit claim that
Reynolds intentionally misled consumers by labeling certain bags as
"recycling." In reality, these bags cannot be recycled by most
waste disposal facilities, the class action lawsuit contends.
In order to receive a settlement payment, consumers must submit a
valid claim form by Dec. 13, 2023.
Ashley Furniture False Sale Pricing Class Action Lawsuit
Settlement
Ashley Furniture agreed to a settlement to resolve a class action
lawsuit claiming that it advertised misleading discounts which
tricked consumers into making purchases.
The settlement benefits individuals who purchased items from Ashley
Furniture that were advertised at a discount in-store between March
9, 2017, and March 31, 2022, or online between April 13, 2018, and
March 13, 2022.
According to the false sale class action lawsuit, Ashley Furniture
used misleading reference prices that did not actually reflect the
prices at which the sale items were typically sold. As a result of
these misrepresentations, consumers were allegedly deceived into
making purchases based on the belief that they were getting a great
deal.
The deadline to file a claim with the settlement is Dec. 23, 2023.
Crunchyroll, Sony Pictures Video Privacy $16M Class Action
Settlement
Crunchyroll and parent company Sony Pictures agreed to pay $16
million to resolve claims that they unlawfully shared subscriber
information with Facebook, Google and other third parties.
The settlement benefits individuals who were registered Crunchyroll
users and who viewed videos on the company's website, mobile app or
other platform.
Crunchyroll and Sony Pictures allegedly violated the Video Privacy
Protection Act by sharing subscriber information without first
getting their consent. The companies allegedly shared activity and
other sensitive information with third parties such as Facebook and
Google.
In order to receive a settlement payment, consumers must submit a
valid claim form by Dec. 12, 2023.
Broiler Chicken Price-Fixing $181 Million Class Action Settlement
Several chicken processors including Tyson agreed to pay a combined
$181 million to resolve a class action lawsuit claiming that they
conspired together to raise and fix the price of broiler chicken
products.
The settlement benefits purchasers of whole chicken, chicken
breasts or chicken wings who purchased the products indirectly
(through a retailer) from Fieldale, George's, Mar-Jac, Peco,
Pilgrim's Pride and Tyson in certain states between Jan. 1, 2009,
and July 31, 2009.
The massive antitrust class action lawsuit accused the chicken
processors of conspiring together to raise the price of chicken
products above what it would have been in a competitive market. As
a result of this reported scheme, consumers allegedly had to pay a
higher price for chicken products.
The deadline to file a claim with the settlement is Dec. 31, 2023.
Kia, Hyundai Engine Failure Class Action Settlement
Kia reached a class action lawsuit settlement with consumers who
claim that certain Kia and Hyundai vehicles suffer from engine
defects that could cause catastrophic problems.
The settlement benefits owners and lessees of certain Hyundai and
Kia vehicles equipped with defective engines.
Plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit claim the engines in certain
Kia and Hyundai vehicles have a defective connecting rod bearing,
leading to engine seizure, stalling, engine failure and engine
fires. Kia allegedly knew about the defect but refused to cover
related repairs under warranty or otherwise compensate injured
consumers.
In order to receive a settlement payment, drivers must submit a
valid claim form by Dec. 7, 2023.
TenantReports.com Background Reports $877K Class Action Settlement
TenantReports.com agreed to pay $877,800 to resolve claims that it
violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by including outdated
criminal non-convictions in tenant background checks.
The settlement benefits consumers who were the subject of a
TenantReports.com report prepared between April 8, 2020, and April
9, 2023, where the report included at least one criminal
non-conviction that was older than seven years.
TenantReports.com allegedly violated tenant FCRA rights by
including outdated criminal non-convictions on certain background
reports. Under FCRA, criminal non-convictions can only legally be
reported for seven years.
The deadline to file a claim with the settlement is Dec. 5, 2023.
Spartan Mosquito False Advertising $3.6M Class Action Settlement
AC2T reached a $3.6 million class action lawsuit settlement with
consumers who claim that Spartan Mosquito products are falsely
advertised.
The settlement benefits consumers who purchased Spartan Mosquito,
Mosquito Eradicator and Spartan Mosquito Pro Tech products between
Dec. 21, 2016, and Aug. 2, 2023.
Plaintiffs in the false advertising class action lawsuit claim that
Spartan Mosquito Eradicator and Pro Tech products are advertised as
able to "eradicate" mosquitoes for up to 90 days. In reality, there
is no evidence to back up these claims, the class action lawsuit
contends.
In order to receive a settlement payment, consumers must submit a
valid claim form by Dec. 1, 2023.
Health Net Data Breach $10M Class Action Settlement
Health Net and other related companies agreed to pay $10 million to
resolve claims that a 2021 data breach compromised sensitive
patient information such as Social Security numbers.
The settlement benefits individuals who received a data breach
notification from Health Net informing them that their personal
information was compromised in an FTA data breach that occurred in
January 2021.
The Health Net data breach, which was announced in March 2021,
allegedly compromised the sensitive information of policyholders
and their dependents. The breach compromised addresses, birth
dates, Social Security numbers and other sensitive information, the
plaintiffs contend.
The deadline to submit a claim with the data breach settlement is
Dec. 22, 2023.
Ethos Technologies Data Breach $1M Class Action Settlement
Ethos Technologies agreed to resolve a data breach class action
lawsuit with a $1 million settlement.
The settlement benefits consumers who received a data breach
notification letter from Ethos Technologies informing them that
their information may have been compromised in a data breach that
occurred between August and December 2022.
Plaintiffs claim Ethos Technologies could have prevented the 2022
data breach with reasonable cybersecurity measures but negligently
failed to do so. As a result, hackers were allegedly able to gain
access to sensitive consumer information.
In order to receive a settlement payment, class members must submit
a valid claim form by Dec. 20, 2023.
Broiler Chicken Grower Antitrust $17.75m Class Action Settlement
Sanderson Farms agreed to pay $17.75 million to resolve claims that
it conspired with other companies to short-change broiler chicken
growers.
The settlement benefits chicken growers who were paid for broiler
grow-out services by Sanderson Farms, any other defendant or any
other co-conspirator between Jan. 27, 2013 and Dec. 31, 2019.
Plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit accused Sanderson Farms of
partnering with other prominent companies such as Tyson, Perdue and
Agri Stats to devalue chicken growing services. As a result of the
alleged scheme, broiler chicken growers were allegedly paid less
for their services than they would have been in a competitive
market.
The deadline to submit a claim with the settlement is Dec. 13,
2023. [GN]
BANKERS TRUST: Faces Class Action Over "Crippling" Overdraft Fees
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Clark Kauffman, writing for Iowa Capital Dispatch, reports that An
Iowa bank is facing a potential class-action lawsuit claiming it
has charged "crippling" overdraft fees to its customers' accounts.
The lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of Iowa, challenges Bankers Trust's alleged practice of charging
overdraft fees on debit-card transactions that have been authorized
by the bank itself due to the availability of sufficient funds in
the customers' accounts.
The lawsuit centers on the controversial use of fees applied to
so-called "Authorize Positive, Settle Negative" transactions, or
APSN transactions.
The alleged practice works this way: The moment a purchase is made
from a merchant using a debit card, the bank immediately reduces
the customer's checking account balance by the amount of that
purchase. The bank also sets aside the full dollar amount of the
purchase, holding that money in reserve for the merchant.
However, the bank will then impose a $33 overdraft fee on the
transaction if, days later when the bank forwards the reserved
funds to the merchant, the customer's funds are depleted and the
account shows a negative balance.
Essentially, the overdraft fee isn't simply applied to transactions
for which there are no funds; it's imposed on transactions for
which the bank is actually holding a customer's cash in reserve to
ensure payment.
The lawsuit alleges these "crippling" overdraft fees are
unwarranted because a customer's balance is always adjusted, in
real-time, to account for every debit-card transaction at the
precise instant the transaction is made. "Indeed," the lawsuit
alleges, "the entire purpose of the immediate debit and hold of
positive funds is to ensure that there are enough funds in the
account to pay the transaction."
The lawsuit alleges that while many banks and credit unions "that
employ this abusive practice require their accountholders to
expressly agree to it" when they open an account, Bankers Trust
never did.
Bankers Trust, the lawsuit claims, was fully aware that its
customers believed they couldn't be assessed overdraft fees for
debit-card purchases given that the funds needed to cover those
purchases were instantly set aside by the bank and held in reserve
to ensure payment.
"Besides being deceptive, unfair, and unconscionable, these
practices breach contract promises" made to customers, the lawsuit
claims. "In breach of these promises, (Banks Trust) assesses $33
overdraft fees when there is enough money in the account to cover
the transaction."
The plaintiff in the case, Stephanie Jones of Iowa, was allegedly
assessed overdraft fees of $33 each on Nov. 18, 2022, and May 8,
2023. Those fees were imposed on debit-card transactions that had
been authorized by Bankers Trust due to the availability of
sufficient funds in Jones' account, the lawsuit claims.
The fees were not imposed in error, but were intentional charges
made in accordance with Bankers Trust written policies and routine
practices related to APSN fees, the petition states.
As part the lawsuit, lawyers for Jones note that in 2021, the
largest financial institutions in America charged customers almost
$11 billion in overdraft fees. Customers who carried an average
balance of less than $350 reportedly paid 84 percent of those
fees.
While some banks, including Bank of America, Capital One, Wells
Fargo and others -- have taken steps to eliminate such fees -- some
have not. The lawsuit claims Bankers Trust continues to assess
overdraft fees on APSN transactions and that the bank "has made
substantial revenue -- to the tune of tens of millions of dollars
-- seeking to turn its customers' financial struggles into
revenue."
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has called APSN fees
"unfair" and "deceptive," noting that consumers typically have no
reason to anticipate such fees since they aren't always disclosed
to consumers.
In October 2022, the bureau warned that even if a consumer closely
monitors their account balance and carefully calibrates their
spending, they can easily incur an overdraft fee. When a customer
checks their account balance online or at an ATM, the amount
displayed may be sufficient to cover their planned purchases -- but
the balance in the account may not be sufficient to cover the
purchases days later when the bank chooses to process the
transactions.
In some cases, depending on the order in which a bank structures
debit-card purchases, a customer can be charged multiple overdraft
fees in quick succession, driving their account balance even
further into the red.
The lawsuit notes that banks can protect themselves from true
overdrafts by simply rejecting transactions once an account shows
insufficient funds. Instead, the lawsuit claims, banks process the
transactions, hold the money for the purchases in reserve, and then
impose the APSN overdraft fees as a way to generate millions in
revenue at the expense of customers who can least afford such
fees.
The lawsuit seeks class-action status to represent not only Jones
but all other Bankers Trust customers who have been subjected to
APSN overdraft fees. It seeks unspecified damages for breach of
contract and violations of the federal Electronic Funds Transfer
Act.
Bankers Trust has yet to file a response to the lawsuit and the
company's media representative could not be reached for comment on
Dec. 1
Bankers Trust is headquartered in Des Moines and is the state's
largest privately held community bank. In addition to 12 branches
serving central Iowa, Bankers Trust has branches in Cedar Rapids
and Phoenix, Arizona, as well as an office in Omaha, Nebraska.
Jones is represented by attorney Roxanne Conlin of Des Moines as
well as lawyers working for four other out-of-state firms. [GN]
BLUEWATER HEALTH: Faces Class Action Following Ransomware Attack
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Becken, writing for CBC News, reports that a $480-million
proposed class action lawsuit has been filed against the five
Ontario hospitals hit by a recent ransomware attack -- and the IT
company that services them.
Robert Smith is the lawsuit's lone named plaintiff. The Sarnia man
has been a patient of Bluewater Health throughout his life,
according to court documents, for various medical treatments.
Bluewater, Windsor Regional Hospital, Chatham-Kent Health Alliance,
Erie Shores HealthCare, Hôtel-Dieu Grace Healthcare and TransForm
Shared Service are the organizations named in the suit.
In a joint response, the hospitals and TransForm acknowledged they
are in "receipt of a lawsuit related to the cyberattack," and with
it now being a legal matter before the courts, they will not be
commenting further about it.
All have been hard hit by the Oct. 23 cyberattack that ended up
exposing patient records and information, and altering care.
Cybercriminial group Daixin has claimed responsibility for the
attack and has published some of the stolen data on the dark web.
The lawsuit alleges that so far roughly 267,000 people have been
discovered to be affected by the breach.
The hospitals and IT service provider owed the patients a "duty of
care," according to the statement of claim, by handling, storing
and protecting their personal information -- which was breached --
including privacy.
It says the mental health of the plaintiff and class action members
has also been impacted, arising from their "anxiety and distress"
upon being told of the security breach.
"Such mental injuries were within the reasonable contemplation of
the defendants at the time that the relationship was formed," the
statement of claim read. "They are serious, prolonged, and rise
above the ordinary annoyances, anxieties and fears that come with
living in modern day society."
The lawsuit alleges the breach occurred due to the hospitals and
its IT service providing "inadequate technical and procedural
safeguards."
"The cyberattackers were able to gain access to the computer
systems because the defendants knowingly or recklessly failed to
take steps to protect the personal information in its computer
systems, and failed to have adequate information technology
securities policies in place."
None of the allegations in the lawsuit statement of claim have been
proven in court. Class action lawsuits have to be certified by a
judge before they can proceed.
The hospitals said they refused to pay the requested ransom. [GN]
CATASTROPHE RESPONSE: Collins Suit Seeks to Send Notice to Workers
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as C. M. COLLINS, N. J.
LUNDY, and R. C. L. MAYS, individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, v. CATASTROPHE RESPONSE UNIT, INC. and
CATASTROPHE RESPONSE UNIT USA, INC., Case No. 4:22-cv-01073-SDJ
(E.D. Tex.), the Plaintiffs seek to send court-authorized notice to
similarly situated workers defined as:
"All individuals who worked for CRU as Desk Adjusters in the
United
States, were classified as independent contractors, and were
compensated on a day rate basis within the three-year period
preceding the filing of this lawsuit."
The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants violated the Fair Labor
Standards Act (FLSA), by failing to pay Plaintiffs and other
similarly situated workers overtime wages as required by the FLSA
for any hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a single workweek.
The Plaintiffs and potential plaintiffs are current and former
insurance desk adjusters who worked from home for CRU, were paid on
a daily rate, were misclassified as independent contractors, and
routinely worked over 40 hours in a workweek without being paid an
overtime premium for hours over 40.
The Plaintiffs request Defendants be ordered to produce within 14
days of the granting of this Motion an Excel (.xls) file containing
the names, all known addresses, all email addresses, all telephone
numbers (home, mobile, etc.), and beginning and ending dates of
their working relationship with Defendants of all individuals who
worked for CRU as Desk Adjusters in the United States, were
classified as independent contractors, and were compensated on a
day rate basis within the three-year period preceding the filing of
this lawsuit.
CRU is engaged in the business of providing "daily claims,
catastrophe response, and loss control services" to their
clients—major insurance carrier clients in the United States and
Canada.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Nov. 28, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3uKq1LU at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Kerry V. O'Brien, Esq.
O'BRIEN LAW FIRM
1011 Westlake Drive
Austin, TX 78746
Telephone: (512) 410-1960
Facsimile: (512) 410-6171
E-mail: ko@obrienlawpc.com
- and -
Travis Gasper, Esq.
GASPER LAW, PLLC
1408 N. Riverfront Blvd., Suite 323
Dallas, TX 75207
Telephone: (469) 663-7736
Facsimile: (833) 957-2957
E-mail: travis@travisgasper.com
CENGAGE LEARNING: Filing for Class Cert Bids Due Feb. 20, 2024
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Kleiner v. Cengage
Learning Holdings II, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-10245 (D.
Mass., Filed Feb. 14, 2022), the Hon. Judge Richard G. Stearns
entered an order granting in part and denying in part motion for
extension of time.
-- Class discovery will be completed by: Jan. 16, 2024
-- Class certification motions will be Feb. 20, 2024
filed by:
-- Any oppositions will be filed by: March 7, 2024
-- All fact discovery will be completed June 10, 2024
By:
-- Dispositive motions will be filed by: July 10, 2024
-- Oppositions will be filed by: July 31, 2024
The nature of sui states Unfair and Deceptive Trade Acts.
Cengage serves the higher education, secondary education, workforce
skills, ELT, and research markets around the world.[CC]
CENTIMARK CORP: Initial Approval of Class & PAGA Settlement Sought
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANTHONY LINGLE,
individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated
employees, v. CENTIMARK CORPORATION, a Pennsylvania Corporation;
and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, Case No. 2:22-cv-01471-KJM-JDP (E.D.
Cal.), the Plaintiff moves for entry of an Order for the following:
1. Preliminarily certifying the proposed class for purposes
of settlement;
2. Preliminarily appointing Plaintiff Anthony Lingle as class
representative for purposes of settlement;
3. Preliminarily appointing Shimoda & Rodriguez Law, PC, as
Class
Counsel for purposes of settlement;
4. Preliminarily approving the proposed class action and Private
Attorneys General Act settlement, in the amount of $600,000,
which is incorporated herein by reference;
5. Preliminarily approving the appointment of Apex Class Action,
LLC, as the Settlement Administrator;
6. Preliminarily approving the settlement of claims under the
Private Attorneys General Act for the total amount of
$140,000,
75% of which will be paid to the Labor and Workforce
Development
Agency and 25% of which will be paid to PAGA Members;
7. Approving as to form and content the Notice of Class Action
Settlement, which provides Class Members information
regarding
the settlement, their ability to opt out of, or object to,
the
class action settlement and which provides instruction on how
to
dispute an individual’s settlement allocation under the
proposed
settlement agreement;
8. Approving the proposed procedures to notify the class and
determining that the proposed notification procedures and
process complies with Class Members’ due process rights and
directing the Notice of Class Action Settlement to be sent by
first class mail to Class Members;
9. Directing Defendant to report the Class Data, to the
Settlement
Administrator to administer the settlement proceeds;
10. Scheduling a fairness hearing on the question of whether the
proposed settlement should be finally approved as fair,
reasonable, and adequate;
11. Directing that any amount from settlement checks that were
not
cashed by the check cashing deadline be donated to Salvation
Army Sacramento Metro under the doctrine of cy pres; and
12. Preliminarily and conditionally approving and adopting the
Proposed Order and its implementation schedule, which is
filed
herewith and incorporated by reference.
CentiMark is a national roofing contractor company.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Nov. 22, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RtE5SZ at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Galen T. Shimoda, Esq.
Justin P. Rodriguez, Esq.
Renald Konini, Esq.
SHIMODA & RODRIGUEZ LAW, PC
9401 East Stockton Boulevard, Suite 120
Elk Grove, CA 95624
Telephone: (916) 525-0716
Facsimile: (916) 760-3733
E-mail: attorney@shimodalaw.com
jrodriguez@shimodalaw.com
rkonini@shimodalaw.com
CHEMOCENTRYX INC: Seeks to Seal Portions of Class Cert Opposition
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JONNIE HOMYK, Individually
and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. CHEMOCENTRYX,
INC. and THOMAS J. SCHALL, Case No. 4:21-cv-03343-JST (N.D. Cal.),
the Defendants ask the Court to enter an order provisionally
sealing portions of their Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for
Class
Certification.
The Defendants say that these documents reflect information or
testimony Non-Party TimesSquare Capital Management, LLC has
designated confidential or provisionally confidential pursuant to
Section 5 of the Stipulated Protective Order.
As a result, ChemoCentryx has filed under seal the documents to
afford Non-Party TimesSquare Capital Management, LLC an opportunity
to defend its confidentiality designations.
Document Text to be Sealed Basis for Sealing
Defendants' 10:8-9;10:27-29; 11:27-28; Local Rule
79-5(e):
Opposition 20:28-28.5; 27:26-28 Contains
information
designated
provisionally
confidential by
Non-
Party TimesSquare
Capital Management,
LLC
Exhibit 3 Entire Document Local Rule 79-5(e):
Contains information
designated
provisionally
confidential by
Non-Party
TimesSquare
Capital Management,
LLC
ChemoCentryx is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Nov. 22, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3NbqRHR at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Michele D. Johnson, Esq.
Colleen C. Smith, Esq.
Meryn C. N. Grant, Esq.
Susan E. Engel, Esq.
LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
650 Town Center Drive, 20th Floor
Costa Mesa, CA 92626-1925
Telephone: (714) 540-1235
Facsimile: (714) 755-8290
E-mail: Michele.Johnson@lw.com
Colleen.Smith@lw.com
Meryn.Grant@lw.com
Susan.Engel@lw.com
CLEVELAND CLINIC: Fails to Provide Proper Wages, Garner Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
DEBORAH GARNER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. THE CLEVELAND CLINIC FOUNDATION d/b/a
CLEVELAND CLINIC, Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-02258 (S.D. Ohio,
Nov. 21, 2023) is a class action against the Defendant for unlawful
labor practices in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, and
the Ohio Revised Code.
According to the complaint, the Defendant did not pay overtime
compensation to Plaintiff and the members of the FLSA Collective at
the rate of one and one-half times their regular rate for all of
their overtime hours worked. The Defendant has also violated Ohio's
semimonthly payment of wage requirements due to unpaid wages of
more than 30 days beyond their regularly scheduled payday.
Plaintiff Garner was employed by Defendant from approximately 2020
to August 2023 as a non-exempt employee. Plaintiff Garner's most
recent job was a patient registrar/patient access specialist.
Cleveland Clinic is a multinational healthcare provider.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph F. Scott, Esq.
Ryan A. Winters, Esq.
SCOTT & WINTERS LAW FIRM, LLC
50 Public Square, Suite 1900
Cleveland, OH 44113
Telephone: (216) 912-2221
Facsimile: (440) 846-1625
E-mail: jscott@ohiowagelawyers.com
rwinters@ohiowagelawyers.com
- and -
Kevin M. McDermott II, Esq.
SCOTT & WINTERS LAW FIRM, LLC
11925 Pearl Rd., Suite 310
Strongsville, OH 44136
Telephone: (216) 912-2221
Facsimile: (440) 846-1625
E-mail: kmcdermott@ohiowagelawyers.com
- and -
Seth R. Lesser, Esq.
Christopher M. Timmel, Esq.
KLAFTER LESSER LLP
Two International Drive, Suite 350
Rye Brook, NY 10573
Telephone: (914) 934-9200
E-mail: seth@klafterlesser.com
christopher.timmel@klafterlesser.com
CLOUDLAKE DERMATOLOGY: Martinez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Cloudlake
Dermatology, PLLC. The case is styled as Silvia Martinez, on behalf
of herself and all others similarly situated v. Cloudlake
Dermatology, PLLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-08704-EK-JAM (E.D.N.Y., Nov.
27, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Cloudlake -- https://cloudlakedermatology.com/ -- is at the cutting
edge of dermatology.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
PeterPaul Elhamy Shaker, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
1 University Plaza, Ste. 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Email: pshaker@steinsakslegal.com
CLUB EXPLORIA: Files 7th Cir. Appeal in Moore TCPA Suit
-------------------------------------------------------
CLUB EXPLORIA, LLC has filed an appeal from a ruling entered in the
lawsuit entitled George Moore, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Club Exploria, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-02504, in the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of Illinois.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the Plaintiff
brings this action against Club Exploria on behalf of a proposed
nationwide class of other persons who received illegal
telemarketing calls from or on behalf of the Defendants in
violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).
On October 4, 2022, the Defendant filed a Motion for Summary
Judgment. On October 5, 2022, the Plaintiff moved for Class
Certification.
On August 17, 2023, Judge Harry D. Leinenweber denied Defendant's
Motion for Summary Judgment and granted Plaintiff's Motion for
Class Certification.
The appellate case is captioned George Moore v. Club Exploria, LLC,
Case No. 23-3215, in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Seventh Circuit, filed on November 17, 2023. [BN]
Plaintiff-Appellee GEORGE MOORE, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated, is represented by:
Keith J. Keogh, Esq.
KEOGH LAW, LTD.
55 W. Monroe Street
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: (312) 726-1092
Defendant-Appellant CLUB EXPLORIA, LLC is represented by:
Brittany A. Andres, Esq.
TROUTMAN AMIN LLP
400 Spectrum Center
Irvine, CA 92618
- and -
Peter A. Silverman, Esq.
SMITH, GAMBRELL & RUSSELL, LLP
311 S. Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 264-1004
COINBASE GLOBAL: Woody Appeals Order Compelling Arbitration
-----------------------------------------------------------
DALLAS WOODY, et al. are taking an appeal from a court order
granting the Defendants' motion to compel individual arbitration in
lawsuit entitled Dallas Woody, et al., on behalf of themselves and
all other similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Coinbase Global, Inc.,
et al., Defendants, Case No. 3:23-cv-00190-JD, in the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of California.
In this putative class action, the Plaintiffs allege that Coinbase
reneged on a promise to deliver "airdrops" of new cryptocurrencies
from the Flare blockchain network. An airdrop is an online transfer
of a newly minted digital asset to owners of an existing digital
asset. The Plaintiffs say that they were entitled to two airdrops,
in 2021 and 2023, and that Coinbase's failure to timely deliver the
new coins to their wallets cost them money. They allege common law
and California statutory claims on behalf of a proposed nationwide
class of Coinbase customers.
On June 12, 2023, the Defendants filed a motion to compel
individual arbitration, which the Court granted through an Order
entered by Judge James Donato on Oct. 17, 2023. The Plaintiffs'
claims were ordered to arbitration on an individual basis, and the
case was dismissed without prejudice.
The appellate case is captioned Woody, et al. v. Coinbase Global,
Inc., et al., Case No. 23-3584, in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, filed on November 17, 2023.
The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that:
-- Appellant Mediation Questionnaire was due on November 22,
2023;
-- Appellant Appeal Opening Brief is due on December 27, 2023;
and
-- Appellee Appeal Answering Brief is due on January 26, 2024.
[BN]
Plaintiffs-Appellants DALLAS WOODY, et al., on behalf of themselves
and all other similarly situated, are represented by:
Frederick Anthony Rispoli, Esq.
HODL LAW CALI
27762 Antonio Parkway, Suite 232
Ladera Ranch, CA 92694
Defendants-Appellants COINBASE, INC., et al. are represented by:
Steven Paul Ragland, Esq.
KEKER, VAN NEST & PETERS, LLP
633 Battery Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
CONSOLIDATED EDISON: 122nd Street Alleges Improper Gas Rates
------------------------------------------------------------
122ND STREET, LLC, and 150 WEST BURNSIDE, LLC, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. CONSOLIDATED
EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC., Defendant, Case No. 534418/2023
(N.Y. Sup., Kings Cty., Nov. 22, 2023) is a class action seeking to
redress Defedant's charging of an improper, higher gas rate to
thousands of New York customers, including Plaintiffs, in violation
of the plain and unambiguous terms of Consolidated Edison's gas
tariff.
According to the complaint, Con Edison is bound by the terms of its
gas tariff. Pursuant to the terms of its tariff, Con Edison may
only charge a customer a gas rate under the SC-3 (Residential and
Religious - Heating Firm Sales Service) rate classification if the
customer meets the criteria for the SC-3 classification as set
forth in the tariff. Otherwise, the customer is disqualified for
the SC-3 classification and must instead be charged a rate under
the SC-2 (General Firm Sales) rate classification.
However, contrary to the express provisions of its gas tariff
(which Con Edison itself authored), Con Edison has improperly
billed thousands of customers who do not meet the criteria for the
SC-3 rate classification (and who instead should receive gas
service under the SC-2 rate classification) a SC-3 gas rate. This
has resulted in Con Edison generating millions in unjust revenues
from unsuspecting customers who are unaware that Con Edison is
billing them under an improper rate classification, says the suit.
Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. is one of the U.S.
largest energy delivery companies and provides gas service to
customers in all of New York City, New York and in Westchester
County, New York.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Vicki J. Maniatis, Esq.
Mathew Shooshtary, Esq.
James R. DeMay, Esq.
Patrick M. Wallace, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
Garden City, NY 11530
Telephone: (800) 530-9800
E-mail: vmaniatis@milberg.com
mshooshtary@milberg.com
jdemay@milberg.com
pwallace@milberg.com
- and -
Michael Steifman, Esq.
Steven P. Knowlton, Esq.
STEIFMAN LLP
292 Montauk Highway
South Hampton, NY 11968
Telephone: (718) 645-4100
E-mail: ms@steifmanlaw.com
sknowlton@steifmanlaw.com
CRISTIANO RONALDO: Faces Class Action Over Binance NFT Promotion
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Associated Press reports that Portuguese soccer star Cristiano
Ronaldo has been hit with class-action lawsuit seeking at least $1
billion in damages for his role in promoting cryptocurrency-related
"non-fungible tokens," or NFTs, issued by the beleaguered
cryptocurrency exchange Binance.
The lawsuit filed in federal court in the Southern District of
Florida on Nov. 27 alleges that Ronaldo's promotion of Binance was
"deceptive and unlawful." Binance's partnership with high-profile
figures like Ronaldo, the plaintiffs claim, led them into costly
and unsafe investments.
MORE: Euro 2024 draw is tomorrow, Portugal placed in Pot 1.
Everything you need to know
"Evidence now reveals that Binance's fraud was only able to reach
such heights through the offer and sale of unregistered securities,
with the willing help and assistance of some of the wealthiest,
powerful and recognized organizations and celebrities across the
globe -- just like Defendant Ronaldo," the suit reads.
Representatives for Ronaldo declined to comment on Nov. 30.
Binance, the world's largest cryptocurrency exchange, did not
immediately return requests for statement from The Associated
Press.
Ronaldo launched his inaugural NFT "CR7" collection with Binance in
November of last year, ahead of the 2022 World Cup. The NFTs --
which had starting prices ranging from the equivalent of about $77
to $10,000 -- featured seven animated statues depicting Ronaldo
from iconic moments in his life, from bicycle-kick goals to his
childhood in Portugal.
The Nov. 27 suit says that the promotional efforts of Ronaldo's
Binance partnership were "incredibly successful" -- alleging a 500%
increase in online searches using the keyword "Binance" after the
soccer star's NFTs was announced. The collection's premium-level
NFTs sold out within the first week, the suit claims.
The suit also alleges that Ronaldo should've disclosed how much
Binance has paid him for the partnership. The U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission previously noted that federal law requires
celebrities to publicly disclose how much they're getting paid to
promote securities, including crypto assets.
NFTs are ordinary digital images with an attached version number
that have been added to a cryptocurrency blockchain, a process
designed to make them "unique" collectibles. NFTs enjoyed a brief
boom, but have since largely collapsed in value as the crypto
industry has been marred by scandals and market meltdowns.
Over the summer, Binance was accused of operating as an
unregistered securities exchange and violating a slew of U.S.
securities laws in a lawsuit from regulators. The crypto exchange
agreed to pay a roughly $4 billion settlement and its founder
Changpeng Zhao stepped down as CEO and pleaded guilty to a felony
related to his failure to prevent money laundering on the
platform.
The lawsuit against Ronaldo isn't the first time that a celebrity
has faced litigation over crypto promotions. Last year, for
example, a host of Hollywood and sports stars -- including Larry
David and Tom Brady -- were named as defendants in a class-action
suit against FTX, which was the second-largest crypto exchange
before it collapsed in November 2022. The suit argued that the
celebrities' status made them culpable for promoting FTX's failed
business model.
Ronaldo is one of the most recognizable and wealthiest athletes in
the world. He leads his home country Portugal's national team and
has played for the Spanish team Real Madrid, the Italian club
Juventus and Manchester United in England. He now plays for the
Saudi Arabian professional team Al Nassr.
Ronaldo has continued to promote Binance on his official website
and social media platforms. Most recently, on X (the platform
formerly known as Twitter) Ronaldo reposted a Binance video and
wrote that he was "Cooking something up" with the crypto exchange
on Nov. 28. [GN]
CSX TRANSPORTATION: Faces Class Action Over Train Derailment
------------------------------------------------------------
Joanna Marsh, writing for Freight Waves, reports that a class
action lawsuit has been filed against Eastern U.S. Class I rail
carrier CSX over the train derailment that occurred in eastern
Kentucky the day before Thanksgiving.
The lawsuit, filed on Nov. 29 with the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Kentucky, alleges that local community members
experienced symptoms such as difficulty breathing and sore throats
because two rail cars carrying molten sulfur derailed and caught
fire, resulting in the spread of toxic fumes in the area.
The derailment, which occurred at 2:33 p.m. EST on Nov. 22 just
north of Livingston, Kentucky, in Rockcastle County, involved 16
rail cars, including the two that spilled molten sulfur, according
to CSX. No injuries from the derailment were reported.
CSX and emergency responders subsequently extinguished a fire that
occurred as a result of the derailment. The spilled sulfur caught
fire, releasing sulfur dioxide into the air, according to the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, which went to the derailment site
to conduct air quality monitoring. The fire burned overnight until
it was extinguished Thanksgiving morning. EPA said that there were
no more reports of sulfur dioxide detections in the air after the
fire was extinguished.
But that concern about sulfur dioxide being in the air prompted
public officials to a voluntary evacuation order, which was later
rescinded after the fire was extinguished. Kentucky Gov. Andy
Beshear also declared a state of emergency to provide the local
area with access to additional resources, including help from
Kentucky Emergency Management and the Kentucky National Guard.
Lawsuit argues CSX should have been more proactive in preventing
wheel bearing failure
CSX said on Nov. 26 that a failed wheel bearing appeared to be the
cause of the derailment based on its investigation. The rail
carrier hasn't released further details into what might have caused
the failed wheel bearing and how the wheel bearing actually failed,
although it told FreightWaves that the investigation into the
derailment is still ongoing.
But the class action lawsuit asserts that wayside detectors should
have detected any problems with the wheel bearing, particularly if
the wheel bearing was overheated.
"Because of CSX's alleged recklessness and negligence in monitoring
the train's wheel bearings, they've created a potentially deadly
environment for all residents living in the surrounding area of
Rockcastle County," Jean Martin, an attorney with Morgan & Morgan,
the firm filing the lawsuit, said in a Nov. 29 news release.
"First responders to this catastrophe worked diligently for 24
hours to extinguish the fire, while putting themselves at risk of
being exposed to potentially deadly chemicals and toxins. We will
hold all those accountable for this disaster responsible for their
negligence, and will secure justice for those whose lives and homes
have been endangered," Martin said.
According to the release, plaintiffs are seeking relief such as
medical monitoring, punitive damages, damages related to emotional
distress, loss of property value and increased risks of future
illness. The suit says there are more than 100 class members, and
the amount in controversy exceeds $5 million, excluding costs and
interest.
The health of wheel bearings has been in the limelight this year
because an overheated wheel bearing appeared to be the cause of the
Feb. 3 derailment of a Norfolk Southern train in East Palestine,
Ohio. That incident rattled the local community because it also
included the derailment of rail cars carrying vinyl chloride. NS
and officials decided to vent those rail cars out of concerns that
an explosion could occur from the chemical reactions occurring
inside those cars. The venting of the rail cars caused a large
plume of smoke at the derailment site.
The Nov. 29 lawsuit also contends that CSX should have spaced
wayside detectors more closely on its network in order to improve
detection of the wheel bearing failure.
Following the train derailment in East Palestine, public attention
turned to the discrepancies among the Class I railroads over the
spacing of wayside detectors, with some arguing that the spacing
was too far apart in some areas of the nationwide network. The rail
industry responded by saying that the railroads plan to install
additional hot bearing detectors on their networks, with a goal of
achieving an average spacing of 15 miles.
"Before the derailment, the train passed a railroad trackside
detector and then traveled approximately 21 miles before the wheel
bearing completely failed. The train was still two miles away from
the next trackside detector," the lawsuit said. "Across CSX's
networks in the eastern United States, the detectors are an average
of 14.9 miles apart. According to CSX, however, on less traveled
tracks the detectors are sometimes farther apart, as was the case
here."
In addition to claims that the derailment caused the release of
toxic fumes into the area, the suit also alleges that CSX didn't
properly perform inspections of the rail car and its wheels and
brakes, nor did it ensure that qualified employees were performing
the inspections or that the rail carrier was following procedures
required by federal regulations.
The news release from the law firm also said it is involved in a
lawsuit against NS over the East Palestine derailment and it has
"successfully litigated" against major corporations in cases such
as the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill involving BP, the 2015
Porter Ranch gas well blowout in California and the Merrimack
Valley gas explosions in Massachusetts in 2018.
In response to the suit, CSX told FreightWaves in an email: "CSX is
reviewing the allegations in the lawsuit. We pride ourselves on
being a safe railroad and in the rare occurrence of an incident
like the one in Livingston, KY we respond quickly, prioritizing
safety and supporting recovery of the community. We appreciate the
partnership of the Rockcastle County first responders and the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency for their quick response, and the
Red Cross and local businesses that worked with us as we provided
food, lodging and expense reimbursement throughout our recovery
efforts. CSX will continue to provide support for the community."
Following the East Palestine derailment, federal regulators, the
railroad industry and other stakeholders such as shippers and the
railroad craft unions engaged in sometimes public discussions about
workforce training and who should be held liable when incidents
occur on rail cars that are transported by the railroads but owned
by rail shippers.
Some of these discussions became fodder for the railway safety bill
that's currently in the Senate, while others served as the basis
for safety advisories from the Federal Railroad Administration. The
rail industry also said the industry would be taking steps to
bolster rail safety. [GN]
DAIFUKU NORTH: Shaw Labor Suit Seeks to Certify Class, Subclasses
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL SHAW, on behalf of
himself and the Class members; v. DAIFUKU NORTH AMERICA HOLDING
COMPANY, ELITE LINE SERVICES, INC. and DOES 1-100, inclusive; Case
No. 1:21-cv-01084-ADA-CDB (E.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff asks the Court
to enter an order certifying the following classes pursuant to
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rules 23(a) and 23(b)(3):
-- Class
"All current and former hourly, non-exempt employees of
Defendant Elite Line Services, Inc. who worked in California
at
any time during the period of July 12, 2017 until the
resolution
of this action;"
-- Subclasses
Security Check Subclass
"All Class members who worked at an Amazon facility during
the
Class Period;" and
Regular Rate Subclass
"All Class members who were paid overtime and/or meal and
rest
break premiums as well as a nondiscretionary premium payment
during the same workweek during the Class Period."
The Plaintiff seeks certification of the proposed Class and
Subclasses for the following claims alleged in the operative
complaint:
(1) Failure to Pay for All Hours Worked;
(2) Failure to Pay Minimum Wages;
(3) Failure to Pay Overtime Wages;
(4) Failure to Authorize and Permit and/or Make Available Meal
and
Rest Periods;
(5) Failure to Reimburse Business Expenditures;
(6) Failure to Provide Timely and Accurate Itemized Wage
Statements;
(7) Waiting Time Penalties; and
(9) Unlawful Business Practices.
The Plaintiff also wants to appoint himself as a representative for
the proposed lass and Subclasses, and to appoint Schneider Wallace
Cottrell Konecky LLP as Class Counsel for the proposed Class and
Subclasses.
Daifuku provides material handling systems.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Nov. 22, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3GysZFH at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Carolyn H. Cottrell, Esq.
Esther L. Bylsma, Esq.
Philippe M. Gaudard, Esq.
SCHNEIDER WALLACE COTTRELL KONECKY LLP
2000 Powell Street, Suite 1400
Emeryville, CA 94608
Telephone: (415) 421-7100
Facsimile: (415) 421-7105
E-mail: ccottrell@schneiderwallace.com
ebylsma@schneiderwallace.com
pgaudard@schneiderwallace.com
DEL MONTE: More Time Bid for Briefing Schedule OK'd in Gatling-Lee
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Libby Gatling-Lee, Elena
Nacarino, Ana Krstic, Christina Vink, Lora Grodnick, Lisa Malara,
and Teena Stambaugh individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, v. Del Monte Foods, Inc., Case No.
4:22-cv-00892-JST (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Jon S. Tigar entered
an order approving stipulation for extension of time re briefing
schedule:
The Plaintiffs' Oppositions to both motions are currently due on
November 27, 2023.
The Defendant's Replies are currently due on December 4, 2023.
The Plaintiffs' Oppositions to both motions are due no later than
December 7, 2023.
The Defendant's Replies to both motions are due no later than
December 21, 2023.
Del Monte is an American food production and distribution company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 27, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4a96V23 at no extra charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jonas B. Jacobson, Esq.
Simon Franzini, Esq.
DOVEL & LUNER, LLP
201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Telephone: (310) 656-7066
Facsimile: (310) 656-7069
E-mail: jonas@dovel.com
simon@dovel.com
- and -
Zack Broslavsky, Esq.
BROSLAVSKY & WEINMAN, LLP
1500 Rosecrans Ave, Suite 500
Manhattan Beach, CA 90266
Telephone: (310) 575-2550
Facsimile: (310) 464-3550
E-mail: zbroslavsky@bwcounsel.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Kelsey C. Boehm, Esq.
FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
555 South Flower Street, Suite 3300
Los Angeles, CA 90071-2418
Telephone: (213) 972-4500
Facsimile: (213) 486-0065
E-mail: kboehm@foley.com
DENSO MANUFACTURING: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Barton Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------------
GENNA BARTON; and JASON MARTIN, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. DENSO MANUFACTURING
MICHIGAN, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-01257 (W.D. Mich., Nov.
30, 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.
The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendant as staffs.
DENSO MANUFACTURING MICHIGAN, INC. manufactures automotive heating
and cooling systems. The Company offers products such as heater
assemblies, radiators, fan shrouds, heater cores, HVAC unit
assemblies, evaporators, condensers, blower assemblies, oil
coolers, and cooling modules. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jesse L. Young, Esq.
SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
141 E. Michigan Avenue, Suite 600
Kalamazoo, MI 49007
Telephone: (269) 250-7500
Email: jyoung@sommerspc.com
- and -
Kevin J. Stoops, Esq.
SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
1 Towne Sq., 17th Floor
Southfield, MI 48375
Telephone: (248) 355-0300
Email: kstoops@sommerspc.com
- and -
Jonathan Melmed, Esq.
Laura Supanich, Esq.
MELMED LAW GROUP, P.C.
1801 Century Park East, Suite 850
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 824-3828
Email: jm@melmedlaw.com
lms@melmedlaw.com
DISCOUNT TIRE: Stoddard Suit Seeks Notice to Collective Members
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Joshua Stoddard, on behalf
of himself and all similarly situated persons, v. Discount Tire Co,
Inc., et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-08114-DWL (D. Ariz.), the Plaintiff
asks the Court to enter an order:
(1) Authorizing notice to putative Collective Members;
(2) Directing Discount Tire to produce a computer-readable data
file containing the names, last known mailing addresses,
last
known telephone numbers, last known personal email
addresses,
last four digits of putative Collective Members’ Social
Security numbers (for those notices returned undeliverable),
and work locations and dates of employment at each location
for
all putative Collective Members; and
(3) Approving Plaintiff's Proposed Notice and the plan for its
distribution.
The Plaintiff moves the Court for an order allowing Plaintiff to
send notice of this collective action pursuant to Section 216(b) of
the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants unlawfully denied
Assistant Managers ("AMs") proper overtime pay, in violation of the
FLSA. Discount Tire systematically limits AMs' hours to keep its
labor budget low by capping its employees' weekly hours based on
each store's daily tire sales using a metric called Units Per Man
Hour (UPMH).
Discount Tire incentivizes Store Managers("SMs") and Assistant Vice
Presidents ("AVPs") to keep each store's labor budget low by
awarding them bonuses and other benefits based on UPMH.
As a result of Discount Tire's restrictions on AMs' hours, AMs do
not have enough time each day to complete all their work. AMs work
substantial time off the clock before their scheduled hours, during
meal and rest breaks, and after their shifts end.
AMs are frequently required to work off the clock before their
scheduled shifts to perform tasks such as cleaning, counting
inventory, and setting up the store; are required to work through
lunch breaks responding to co-worker or customer questions; and are
required to stay after clocking out to service cars and clean the
store. AMs perform additional work off the clock such as picking up
tires from other stores, depositing money at the bank, and
participating in trainings required by Discount Tire.
The Defendants include The Reinalt-Thomas Corporation, Discount
Tire Co. of Alabama, Inc., Discount Tire, LLC, Discount Tire
Certificate, LLC, Discount Tire Co. of Colorado, Inc., Discount
Tire Co., Discount Tire Co. of Georgia, Inc., Discount Tire Co. of
Iowa, Inc., Indiana Discount Tire Company Inc., Discount Tire Co.
of Kansas, Inc., Discount Tire Co. of Kentucky, Inc., Discount Tire
Co. of Louisiana, Inc., Discount Tire Co. of Minnesota, Inc.,
Discount Tire Co. of Missouri, Inc., Discount Tire Co. of
Mississippi, Inc., Discount Tire Co. of Montana, Inc., Discount
Tire Co. of Nebraska, Inc., Discount Tire Co. of New Mexico, Inc.,
Discount Tire Co. of Nevada, Inc., Discount Tire Co. of North
Carolina, Inc., Discount Tire Co. of North Dakota, Inc., Discount
Tire Co. of Ohio, Inc., Discount Tire Co. of Oklahoma, Discount
Tire Co. of Pennsylvania, Inc., Discount Tire Co. of South
Carolina, Inc., Discount Tire Co. of South Dakota, Inc., Discount
Tire Co. of Tennessee, Inc., Discount Tire Co. of Texas, Inc.,
Discount Tire Co. of Utah, Inc., Discount Tire Co. of Virginia,
Inc., Discount Tire Co. of Washington, Inc., Discount Tire Co. of
Wisconsin, Inc., Discount Tire Co. of West Virginia, Inc., and
Discount Tire Co. of Wyoming, Inc., Discount Tire operates as a
tire and auto parts dealer company.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Nov. 22, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3GoJK6q at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Samuel R. Randall, Esq.
RANDALL LAW PLLC
4742 North 24th Street, Suite 300
Phoenix, AZ 85016
Telephone: (602) 328-0262
Facsimile: (602) 926-1479
E-mail: srandall@randallslaw.com
- and -
Justin M. Swartz, Esq.
Michael J. Scimone, Esq.
Hannah Cole-Chu, Esq.
Kaelyn Mahar, Esq.
OUTTEN & GOLDEN LLP
685 Third Avenue, 25th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Telephone: (212) 245-1000
Facsimile: (646) 509-2060
E-mail: jms@outtengolden.com
hcolechu@outtengolden.com
KMahar@outtengolden.com
- and -
Gregg I. Shavitz, Esq.
Alan Quiles, Esq.
SHAVITZ LAW GROUP, P.A.
951 Yamato Road, Suite 285
Boca Raton, FL 33431
Telephone: (561) 447-8888
Facsimile: (561) 447-8831
E-mail: gshavitz@shavitzlaw.com
aquiles@shavitzlaw.com
DOLLAR GENERAL: Edmonds Alleges Securities Law Violations
---------------------------------------------------------
ROBERT J EDMONDS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DOLLAR GENERAL CORPORATION,
JEFFREY CARL OWEN, JOHN W. GARRATT, KELLY M. DILTS, Defendants,
Case No. 3:23-cv-01259 (M.D. Tenn., November 30, 2023) seeks to
recover damages caused by Defendants' violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.
This is a federal securities class action on behalf of all
investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Dollar's securities
between February 23, 2023 and August 31, 2023, inclusive.
Allegedly, the Defendants provided overwhelmingly positive
statements to investors while, at the same time, disseminating
materially false and misleading statements and/or concealing
material adverse facts concerning supply chain issues, pricing
shifts, and underinvestment in labor. This caused Plaintiff and
other shareholders to purchase Dollar's securities at artificially
inflated prices, says the suit.
Dollar General Corporation is a Tennessee corporation with its
principal executive offices located at 100 Mission Ridge,
Goodlettsville, TN. The company's common stock traded on the New
York Stock Exchange's stock market under the symbol "DG." [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Al Holifield, Esq.
HOLIFIELD & JANICH, PLLC
11907 Kingston Pike, Suite 201
Knoxville, TN 37934
Telephone: (865) 566-0115
Facsimile: (865) 566-0119
E-mail: aholifield@holifieldlaw.com
- and -
Adam M. Apton, Esq.
LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
33 Whitehall Street, 17th Floor
New York, NY 10006
Telephone: (212) 363-7500
Facsimile: (212) 363-7171
E-mail: aapton@zlk.com
DSSV INC: Chalmers Suit Seeks FLSA Class Judicial Notice
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jordan Chalmers,
individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. DSSV,
Inc., d/b/a Brightwheel, Case No. 4:22-cv-08863-HSG (N.D. Cal.),
the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order authorizing the
distribution of judicial notice under the Fair Labor Standards Act
("FLSA).
The Plaintiff moves the Court for an Order:
(1) Directing DSSV, Inc. to produce a list (in Excel or
similar format) of all persons who worked for Defendant as
sales employees, including Sales Development Representatives
("SDRs"), Inside Sales Representatives ("ISRs"), Account
Executives ("AEs"), and/or other positions with similar job
titles and/or duties who were classified as exempt at any
time
three years back from the date of this Court’s Order,
within 10
days of the Court's Order."
This list should include each individual’s (1) name, (2)
job
title, (3) address, (4) cell phone number, (5) dates of
employment, (6) employee identification number, and (7)
personal email address.
(2) Approving Plaintiff's proposed forms of notice and consent to
join form; authorizing distribution of notice by mail, email, and
text message, with a reminder postcard and reminder text
distributed 60 days after the original notice is disseminated; and
approving a 90-day notice period.
DSSV employed Plaintiff Jordan Chalmers and other sales employees
to sell its software to childcare centers but did not pay them
overtime compensation when they worked overtime hours until earlier
this year when it reclassified them as non-exempt.
The Plaintiff brings this action for unpaid overtime on behalf of
himself and others "similarly situated" for the period before
Defendants classified them as overtime eligible.
On December 15, 2022, Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and others
similarly situated, filed this lawsuit for unpaid overtime wages in
violation of the FLSA.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant as an ISR, remotely from his
home in Austin, Texas from approximately May 2021 to May 2022.
The Defendant is a California company that is in the business of
preschool and childcare management software that integrates
automatic billing and payments, real-time communication, and
classroom management.
It provides tools for assessment, communication and photo sharing,
and administrators can manage their business with enrollment,
reporting, and online bill pay.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Nov. 27, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4a7J7LU at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel S. Brome, Esq.
Michele R. Fisher, Esq.
Kayla M. Kienzle, Esq.
NICHOLS KASTER, LLP
235 Montgomery St., Suite 810
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (415) 277-7235
Facsimile: (415) 277-7238
E-mail: dbrome@nka.com
fisher@nka.com
kkienzle@nka.com
- and –
Charles Scalise, Esq.
ROSS SCALISE LAW GROUP, P.C.
1104 San Antonio Street
Austin, TX 78701
Telephone: (510) 270-2614
Facsimile: (510) 474-5306
E-mail: charles@rosslawpc.com
DTE ELECTRIC: Hinson Seeks Proper Overtime Compensation
-------------------------------------------------------
CHRISTOPHER J. HINSON, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DTE ELECTRIC COMPANY, a Michigan
corporation, Defendant, Case No. 2:23-cv-13032-JEL-DRG (W.D. Mich.,
November 30, 2023) seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation,
liquidated damages, attorney's fees, costs, and other relief as
appropriate under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiff has worked for Defendant since approximately August
20, 2018 as a non-exempt, hourly employee. Throughout Plaintiff's
employment with Defendant, on occasions where he worked Sundays, he
also earned a shift differential. However, the Defendant failed to
incorporate any shift differentials into its hourly employees'
regular hourly rate calculation, resulting in prima facie
violations of the FLSA, says the suit.
DTE Electric Company is the largest electric utility in Michigan.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jesse L. Young, Esq.
SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
141 E. Michigan Avenue, Suite 600
Kalamazoo, MI 49007
Telephone: (269) 250-7500
E-mail: jyoung@sommerspc.com
- and -
Kevin J. Stoops, Esq.
SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
One Town Square, 17th Floor
Southfield, MI 48076
Telephone: (248) 355-0300
E-mail: kstoops@sommerspc.com
- and -
Jonathan Melmed, Esq.
Laura Supanich, Esq.
MELMED LAW GROUP, P.C.
1801 Century Park East, Suite 850
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 824-3828
E-mail: jm@melmedlaw.com
lms@melmedlaw.com
E.I. DUPONT: Final Approval of Class Settlement Sought in Camden
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CITY OF CAMDEN, et al., v.
E.I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY (n/k/a EIDP, Inc.), et al., Case
No. 2:23-cv-03230-RMG (D.S.C.), the Plaintiffs asks the Court to
enter an order granting final approval of class settlement and
final certification of the settlement class.
The suit is consolidated in AQUEOUS FILM-FORMING FOAMS PRODUCTS
LIABILITY LITIGATION, Master Docket No.: 2:18-mn-2873-RMG
E.I. du Pont is a diversified chemical company operating in more
than 80 countries.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Nov. 21, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3uA6U72 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Michael A. London, Esq.
DOUGLAS AND LONDON P.C.
59 Maiden Lane, 6th Floor
New York, NY 10038
Telephone: (212) 566-7500
Facsimile: (212) 566-7501
E-mail: mlondon@douglasandlondon.com
- and -
Paul J. Napoli, Esq.
NAPOLI SHKOLNIK
1302 Avenida Ponce de León
San Juan, PR 00907
Telephone: (833) 271-4502
Facsimile: (646) 843-7603
E-mail: pnapoli@nsprlaw.com
- and -
Scott Summy, Esq.
BARON & BUDD, P.C.
3102 Oak Lawn Avenue, Suite 1100
Dallas, TX 75219
Telephone: (214) 521-3605
E-mail: ssummy@baronbudd.com
- and -
Elizabeth A. Fegan, Esq.
FEGAN SCOTT LLC
150 S. Wacker Dr., 24th Floor
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 741-1019
E-mail: beth@feganscott.com
- and -
Joseph Rice, Esq.
MOTLEY RICE LLC
28 Bridgeside Blvd.,
Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464
E-mail: jrice@motleyrice.com
- and -
Robert Klonoff, Esq.
LEWIS & CLARK SCHOOL OF LAW
Jordan D. Schnitzer Professor of Law
10101 S. Terwilliger Boulevard
Portland, OR 97219
Telephone: (503) 768-6600
E-mail: klonoff@usa.net
EDGEWELL PERSONAL: Class Cert Bid Hearing Extended to Mar. 28, 2024
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KENNETH GLASSMAN,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
EDGEWELL PERSONAL CARE, LLC, Case No. 3:21-cv-07669-RS (N.D. Cal.),
the Hon. Judge Richard Seeborg entered an order extending class
certification deadlines as follows:
Event Current
Defendant's opposition to the Nov. 28, 2023 Dec. 12,
2023
motion for class certification
and disclosure of expert
reports deadline
Defendant's experts' discovery Jan. 29, 2024 Feb. 12,
2024
completion deadline
Plaintiff's reply to Defendant's Feb. 12, 2024 Mar. 11,
2024
opposition to class certification
and disclosure of rebuttal
expert reports deadline
Plaintiff's motion for class Feb. 29, 2024 Mar. 28,
2024
certification hearing
Edgewell is an American multinational consumer products company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 22, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/416oPym at no extra charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Neal J. Deckant, Esq.
Brittany S. Scott, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1990 North California Boulevard, Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 300-4455
Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
E-mail: ndeckant@bursor.com
bscott@bursor.com
- and -
Ryan J. Clarkson, Esq.
Shireen M. Clarkson, Esq.
Katherine A. Bruce, Esq.
Kelsey J. Elling, Esq.
CLARKSON LAW FIRM, P.C.
22525 Pacific Coast Highway
Malibu, CA 90265
Telephone: (213) 788-4050
Facsimile: (213) 788-4070 E-mail:
rclarkson@clarksonlawfirm.com
sclarkson@clarksonlawfirm.com
kbruce@clarksonlawfirm.com
kelling@clarksonlawfirm.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Thomas H. Davis, Esq.
Megan McCurdy, Esq.
Logan T. Fancher, Esq.
STINSON LLP
1201 Walnut, Suite 2900
Kansas City, MO 64106
Telephone: (816) 691-3439
Facsimile: (816) 412-1100
E-mail: thomas.davis@stinson.com
megan.mccurdy@stinson.com
logan.fancher@stinson.com
- and -
Danielle K. Lewis, Esq.
HAWKINS PARNELL & YOUNG LLP
33 New Montgomery, Suite 800
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 766-3200
Facsimile: (415) 766-3250
E-mail: dlewis@hpylaw.com
FAMILY DOLLAR: Jan. 9, 2024 Settlement Claims Filing Deadline Set
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Lydian Kennin, writing for WMC, reports that if you are a resident
of Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri or Tennessee
and shopped at Family Dollar during the pandemic, you may be
eligible for a $25 Family Dollar gift card following a class action
settlement that was reached after a rat-infested Mid-South
warehouse was discovered in 2022.
According to a public notice from the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of Tennessee, the settlement stems from a pest
infestation lawsuit that was filed in October against Family
Dollar's branches in six Southern states.
In February 2022, the FDA uncovered a rat infestation at Family
Dollar's West Memphis Distribution Center in West Memphis,
Arkansas.
The lawsuit claims the company sold potentially contaminated
products in certain stores between Jan. 1, 2020, and Feb. 18,
2022.
According to court documents, both Family Dollar and the plaintiffs
agreed to a settlement to avoid the costs and risks of a trial.
Family Dollar will provide one $25 gift card per eligible
household, each with the value of $25, to qualifying shoppers who
submit a claim form. The claim will need to be approved before the
gift card is issued.
To learn more about the settlement and submit your claim, click
here: https://shorturl.at/bep68
The deadline to submit a claim is Jan. 9, 2024. [GN]
FCA US: Faces Class Action Over Jeep Clutch Defects
---------------------------------------------------
Corrado Rizzi, writing for ClassAction.org, reports that a proposed
class action alleges certain model year Jeep Wranglers and
Gladiators are plagued by a clutch defect that, if left unfixed,
could lead to a vehicle fire.
The 96-page lawsuit says that the critical clutch pressure plate
found in 2018-2023 model year two-door and four-door Jeep Wranglers
and 2020-2023 Jeep Gladiators with defendant FCA US's six-speed
manual transmission can overheat due to friction and fracture,
which can then crack or fracture the transmission case. If this
occurs, heated debris can come into contact with ignition sources
inside the vehicles' 3.6L V6 engine, causing a loss of propulsion,
ejection of debris onto the roadway, or a vehicle fire, the
complaint states.
According to the suit, the safety risk posed by the Jeep clutch
defect prompted the automaker to recall the vehicles at issue in
February 2023, FCA's third such recall related to the problem.
"The Third Recall explicitly acknowledged that Defendant still has
not fixed the Clutch Defect," the filing says. "To date, Jeep has
not been able to remedy this dangerous Clutch Defect."
A clutch is a driver-operated linkage mechanism that couples a
vehicle's engine to its transmission and allows the driver to
engage or disengage gears to move the car, the suit explains.
Importantly, a clutch and its component parts, namely the friction
plate and pressure plate, must be designed and manufactured to be
strong enough to stay engaged with the engine flywheel in order for
the engine to transmit power to the ground and propel the car, the
case relays.
When a clutch is unable to handle the power, its friction plate
will begin to slip on the flywheel and create high temperatures,
which can, in turn, "create a failure condition that causes the
vehicle to be unusable," the suit stresses, alleging that the
foregoing is "precisely what is happening" to the Wranglers and
Gladiators at issue.
The lawsuit alleges FCA has known about the Jeep clutch defect for
years yet has been unable to fix the issue, despite two previous
recalls, in March 2020 and January 2021, that resulted in the
automaker simply swapping the clutch with "identical, failure prone
units and installing ineffective software." In the relevant time
period, FCA has continued to maintain that the vehicles at issue
are safe, reliable and fit for their ordinary purpose, damaging
owners and lessees financially, the suit says.
According to the complaint, the plaintiffs, who in February 2021
filed a since-dismissed proposed class action against FCA over
similar allegations, each report having smelled a burning clutch
odor during normal operation of their vehicles.
Per the case, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their initial
suit based on FCA's claim that the clutch defect was fixed through
the second recall. The plaintiffs allege FCA "knew and
intentionally misled the Court, or at least remained willfully
blind to the fact that the remedies offered in the Second Recall
were insufficient."
"The Court relied on FCA's false statements," the suit reads. "Even
after a Third Recall consumers are still not being offered a proper
repair for their unreasonably dangerous vehicles."
The lawsuit looks to cover all persons in the United States who
bought, leased or owns a 2018-2023 model year two-door or four-door
Jeep Wrangler or 2020-2023 Jeep Gladiator.
The case is styled Myslivecek et al. v. FCA US LLC, Case No.
2:23-CV-12980. [GN]
FEVER LABS: Nuber Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Cal.
-------------------------------------------------
The case styled as DARCY NUBER, an individual and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FEVER LABS, INC., a
Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, Defendants, Case No.
23STCV21796, was removed from the Superior Court of California,
County of Los Angeles to the United States District Court for the
Central District of California on November 21, 2023.
The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 2:23-cv-09898 to the proceeding.
The complaint alleges nine causes of action against Defendant,
alleging: (1) minimum wage violations; (2) overtime wage
violations; (3) meal period violations; (4) rest period violations;
(5) wage statement penalties; (6) waiting time penalties; (7)
failure to reimburse necessary business expenses; (8) unfair
competition; and (9) civil penalties under the California Private
Attorneys General Act.
Fever Labs, Inc. provides software solutions.[BN]
Defendant Fever Labs, Inc. is represented by:
Benjamin M. Gipson, Esq.
Ryan M. Estes, Esq.
Elias A. Parisca, Esq.
DLA PIPER LLP (US)
2000 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90067-4704
Telephone: (310) 595-3000
Facsimile: (310) 595-3300
E-mail: ben.gipson@us.dlapiper.com
ryan.estes@us.dlapiper.com
elias.parisca@us.dlapiper.com
FIDELITY NATIONAL: Faces Consolidated Securities Suit
-----------------------------------------------------
Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. disclosed in its Form
10-Q report for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2023,
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 7,
2023, that on March 6, 2023, a putative class action was filed in
the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida
by a shareholder of the Company.
The action was consolidated with another action and the
consolidated case is now captioned "In re Fidelity National
Information Services, Inc. Securities Litigation. A lead plaintiff
has been appointed, and a consolidated amended complaint was filed
on August 2, 2023. The consolidated amended complaint names the
company and certain of its current and former officers as
defendants and seeks damages for alleged violations of federal
securities laws in connection with disclosures relating to its
Merchant Solutions segment.
Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated amended
complaint with prejudice on September 22, 2023.
Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. is a multinational
corporation which offers a wide range of financial products and
services, most known for its development of Financial Technology,
or FinTech. As of 2020 it offers its solutions in three primary
segments: Merchant Solutions, Banking Solutions, and Capital Market
Solutions.
FISKER INC: Financial Reports Lack Info, Shareholder Suit Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
IndustryWeek reports that a shareholder in electric-vehicle startup
Fisker Inc. has filed a class-action lawsuit against the company,
according to Robbins LLP, a firm specializing in shareholder rights
that informed investors of the action.
The crux of the case comes from executives allegedly not properly
disclosing what they called a "material weakness" in internal
control over financial reporting. The suit centers around the
recent reporting of Fisker's third-quarter financial results;
here's a timeline of what happened around that event:
Oct. 27: Chief Accounting Officer John Finnucan departs Fisker
after three years in the role.
Oct. 31: Burkhard Huhnke, Fisker's chief technology officer,
resigns for personal reasons. David King is promoted to the role on
Nov. 3.
Nov. 6: Florus Beuting starts work as the company's chief
accounting officer.
Nov. 8: Chairman and CEO Henrik Fisker and his team say they are
delaying reporting third-quarter results, which were scheduled for
that day, until Nov. 13. The reason was the abrupt departure of
Finnucan and Beuting's subsequent arrival.
Nov. 13: Fisker posts disappointing Q3 results. Executives slash
their production forecast for the third time this year and say
deliveries had missed expectations. Revenues of $71.8 million are
far below expectations of nearly $101 million.
Nov. 20: Fisker announces that Beuting left the company on Nov. 14
as part of a Securities and Exchange Commission filing saying its
quarterly report will be delayed.
Nov. 22: Fisker files its Form 10-Q with regulators, where the
"material weaknesses" were disclosed. According to the filing,
Fisker did not "design and maintain an effective control
environment commensurate with its financial reporting
requirements," specifying that a change in key accounting personnel
had caused a knowledge gap to appropriately handle its accounting
matters. In addition, executives said:
The whole accounting department lacked adequate support.
The company said it also had failed to implement effective controls
over its accounting for inventory and other income statements,
which meant executives were unable to properly respond to "changes
to the risks of material misstatement to financial reporting due to
changes in the business."
Certain "non-routine, complex or unusual" events or transactions
hadn't been properly accounted for. This then led the company to
have to adjust some items on its balance sheet for Q3. In the end,
$20 million of expenses that had been incorrectly attributed to
selling, general and administrative work were actually associated
with production set-up activities. That mistake as well as other
inventory adjustments resulted in a $4 million increase in net
loss.
Dec. 1: Fisker provides a business update that includes reports on
its deliveries and partnerships. The company also announced it
would cut its production guidance for the fourth time in 2023 to
just over 10,000 units in order to "prioritize liquidity" and free
up some working capital.
So, back to the shareholder lawsuit: While Fisker may have
everything under control now, the plaintiff alleges Fisker failed
to properly disclose four important points:
-- The material weaknesses in its internal control over financial
reporting
-- Fisker had incorrectly accounted for certain costs
-- As a result of the first two problems, the likely delay in
filing its quarterly report
-- Fisker's infrastructure was limiting its ability to deliver its
production.
Shareholders who feel similarly harmed are able to join the
lawsuit, and potential lead plaintiffs must file their papers by
Jan. 26. [GN]
GENERAL AUTOMOBILE: Class Cert Expert Disclosures Due July 29, 2024
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jennifer Woodburn,
individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, v. The
General Automobile Insurance Services, Inc., Case No.
2:22-cv-01975-APG-DJA (D. Nev.), the Hon. Judge Daniel J. Albregts
entered an order granting in part and denying in part parties'
stipulation as follows:
Amend pleadings/add parties: July 1, 2024
Expert disclosures: July 29, 2024
Rebuttal expert disclosures: August 28, 2024
Discovery cutoff: September 27, 2024
Dispositive motions: October 28, 2024
Joint pretrial order: November 27, 20243
General Automobile is a licensed insurance agency that is a
subsidiary of PGC Holdings Corp. that focuses on auto insurance.
A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 22, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4a38IWm at no extra charge.[CC]
GENERAL FREIGHT: Suit Seeks to Resolve Dispute on Collective Notice
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WILTONE FLOREXIL,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
GENERAL FREIGHT EXPERTS, INC., GENERAL FREIGHT EXPERTS, LLC, and
TRR CARGO LLC, Case No. 0:23-cv-60876-RNS (S.D. Fla.), the
Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order resolving the disputes
relating to form and content of Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
collective action notice and memorandum in support thereof.
Dispute 1: Length of opt-in period.
Dispute 2: Reminder notice.
Dispute 3: Electronic submission of opt-in consent forms (and
language in opt-in notice relating thereto).
Dispute 4: Language about participating in the litigation.
Dispute 5: Language that the Court has certified the case as a
collective action, etc.
Dispute 6: Language about Defendants recovering costs and
seeking
Attorneys' fees.
Dispute 7: A section about the effect of not joining the
lawsuit.
On October 2, 2023, the Court issued an Order Granting Conditional
Collective Action Certification.
The certified FLSA collective is:
"All individuals whom Defendant General Freight Experts, Inc.
engaged as independent contractor drivers since August 15, 2020,
who did not timely receive an hourly rate equal to or exceeding
the
federal minimum wage for all hours worked."
The Court ordered Defendants to produce to Plaintiff by November 1,
2023, "the names, current or last known addresses, telephone
numbers, and email addresses" of all members of the certified
collective.
The Defendants produced the list on November 1, 2023. It contains
109 names of drivers who meet the FLSA collective definition.
The Court further directed the parties "to confer as to the form
and content of the notice that will be disseminated to the
collective action members and to submit a proposed form of notice
to the Court" by November 13, 2023.
The parties have done so and have reached agreement on many issues.
General Freight is a licensed and DOT registered trucking company
running freight hauling business from Maumee, Ohio.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Nov. 27, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3t5yRU4 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Osvaldo Vazquez, Esq.
Hillary Schwab, Esq.
Rachel Smit, Esq.
FAIR WORK, P.C.
192 South Street, Suite 450
Boston, MA 02111
Telephone: (617) 607-3260
Facsimile: (617) 488-2261
E-mail: oz@fairworklaw.com
hillary@fairworklaw.com
rachel@fairworklaw.com
GENESIS HEALTH: Doe Alleges Disclosure of Personal, Health Info
---------------------------------------------------------------
JANE DOE, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GENESIS HEALTH SYSTEM, Defendant, Case No.
4:23-cv-04209-JES-JEH (C.D. Ill., Nov. 21, 2023) seeks to address
Defendant's improper practice of disclosing the confidential
personally identifying information and/or protected health
information of Plaintiff and the proposed Class Members to third
parties, including Meta Platforms, Inc. d/b/a Meta and potentially
others via tracking technologies used on its website.
According to the complaint, the Meta Pixel tracks information about
a website user's device and the URLs and domains they visit. When
configured to do so, the Meta Pixel can track much more, including
a visitor's search terms, button clicks, and form submissions.
Additionally, the Meta Pixel can link a visitor's website
interactions with an individual's unique and persistent Facebook
ID, allowing a user's health information to be linked with their
Facebook profile. Furthermore, by obtaining, collecting, using, and
deriving a benefit from Plaintiff's and Class Members' private
information, Defendant assumed legal and equitable duties to those
individuals to protect and to safeguard their information from
unauthorized disclosure, the suit says.
The Plaintiff seeks to remedy these harms and brings causes of
action for (I) negligence, (ii) invasion of privacy, (iii) breach
of implied contract, (iv) unjust enrichment; (v) breach of
fiduciary duty, and (vi) violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud
and Deceptive Practices Act.
Genesis Health System is a non-profit health system based in
Davenport, Iowa.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lynn A. Toops, Esq.
Amina A. Thomas, Esq.
Mary Kate Dugan, Esq.
COHEN & MALAD, LLP
One Indiana Square, Suite 1400
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Telephone: (317) 636-6481
E-mail: ltoops@cohenandmalad.com
athomas@cohenandmalad.com
mdugan@cohenandmalad.com
- and -
J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
Andrew E. Mize, Esq.
STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
The Freedom Center
223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 254-8801
Facsimile: (615) 255-5419
E-mail: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
amize@stranchlaw.com
- and -
Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
Raina Borelli, Esq.
TURKE & STRAUSS, LLP
613 Williamson St., Suite 201
Madison, WI 53703
Telephone: (608) 237-1775
Facsimile: (608) 509-4423
E-mail: sam@turkestrauss.com
raina@turkestrauss.com
GLOCK INC: Must Oppose Class Cert Bid by Feb. 23, 2024
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as STEVEN C. JOHNSON, an
individual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated,
v. GLOCK, INC., a Georgia Corporation; GLOCK Ges.m.b.H., an
Austrian entity; JOHN and JANE DOES I through V; ABC CORPORATIONS
I-X, XYZ PARTNERSHIPS, SOLE PROPRIETORSHIPS and/or JOINT VENTURES
I-X, GUN COMPONENT MANUFACTURERS I-V, Case No. 3:20-cv-08807-WHO
(CN.D. Cal.), the Court entered an order extending Class
certification briefing Schedule as follows:
1. The new deadline for Defendants to file Feb. 23, 2024
an Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for
Class Certification is:
2. The new deadline for Plaintiff to file May 23, 2024
his Reply in support of his Motion for
Class Certification is:
3. The new hearing date on Plaintiff's June 12, 2024
Motion for Class Certification is:
Glock is a global manufacturer of firearms.
A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 27, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/418YD6n at no extra charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert K. Lewis, Esq.
Amy M. Lewis, Esq.
LEWIS LAW FIRM, PLC
2302 N. 3rd Street
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Telephone: (602) 889-6666
Facsimile: (602) 252-1446
E-mail: rob@lewislawfirm.com
amy@lewislawfirm.com
- and -
Paul R. Kiesel, Esq.
Jeffrey A. Koncius, Esq.
KIESEL LAW LLP
8648 Wilshire Boulevard
Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2910
Telephone: (310) 854-4444
Facsimile: (310) 854-0812
E-mail: kiesel@kiesel.law
koncius@kiesel.law
- and -
Nicholas Panayotopoulos, Esq.
Gary J. Toman, Esq.
Alexander Heydemann, Esq.
WEINBERG WHEELER HUDGINS
GUNN & DIAL LLC
3344 Peachtree Road, NE
Atlanta, GA 30326
Telephone: (404) 876-2700
E-mail: npanayo@wwhgd.com
gtoman@wwhgd.com
aheydemann@wwhgd.com
The Defendants are represented by:
John F. Renzulli, Esq.
Christopher Renzulli, Esq.
Howard B. Schilsky, Esq.
RENZULLI LAW FIRM, LLP
One North Broadway, Suite 1005
White Plains, NY 10601
Telephone: (914) 285-0700
Facsimile: (914) 285-1213
E-mail: jrenzulli@renzullilaw.com
crenzulli@renzullilaw.com
hschilsky@renzullilaw.com
- and -
Paul G. Cereghini, Esq.
Lauren O. Miller, Esq.
Carissa Casolari, Esq.
BOWMAN AND BROOKE LLP
1741 Technology Drive, Suite 200
San Jose, CA 95110
Telephone: (408) 279-5393
Facsimile: (408) 279-5845
E-mail: paul.cereghini@bowmanandbrooke.com
lauren.miller@bowmanandbrooke.com
Carissa.casolari@bowmanandbrooke.com
GLOCK INC: Parties Seek More Time for Class Cert Briefing Schedule
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as STEVEN C. JOHNSON, an
individual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated,
v. GLOCK, INC., a Georgia Corporation; GLOCK Ges.m.b.H., an
Austrian entity; JOHN and JANE DOES I through V; ABC CORPORATIONS
I-X, XYZ PARTNERSHIPS, SOLE PROPRIETORSHIPS and/or JOINT VENTURES
I-X, GUN COMPONENT MANUFACTURERS I-V, Case No. 3:20-cv-08807-WHO
(N.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order continuing
the class
certification briefing schedule:
1. The new deadline for Defendants to file an Opposition to
Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification is February 23,
2024.
2. The new deadline for Plaintiff to file his Reply in support
of
his Motion for Class Certification is May 23, 2024.
3. The new hearing date on Plaintiff's Motion for Class
Certification is June 5, 2024.
Glock is a leading global manufacturer of firearms.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Nov. 21, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3GsKLKw at no extra charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert K. Lewis, Esq.
Amy M. Lewis, Esq.
LEWIS LAW FIRM, PLC
2302 N. 3rd Street
Phoenix, AZ 85004
Telephone: (602) 889-6666
Facsimile: (602) 252-1446
E-mail: rob@lewislawfirm.com
amy@lewislawfirm.com
- and -
Paul R. Kiesel, Esq.
Jeffrey A. Koncius, Esq.
KIESEL LAW LLP
8648 Wilshire Boulevard
Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2910
Telephone: (310) 854-4444
Facsimile: (310) 854-0812
E-mail: kiesel@kiesel.law
koncius@kiesel.law
- and -
Nicholas Panayotopoulos, Esq.
Gary J. Toman, Esq.
Alexander Heydemann, Esq.
WEINBERG WHEELER HUDGINS
GUNN & DIAL LLC
3344 Peachtree Road, NE
Atlanta, GA 30326
Telephone: (404) 876-2700
E-mail: npanayo@wwhgd.com
gtoman@wwhgd.com
aheydemann@wwhgd.com
The Defendants are represented by:
John F. Renzulli, Esq.
Christopher Renzulli, Esq.
Howard B. Schilsky, Esq.
RENZULLI LAW FIRM, LLP
One North Broadway, Suite 1005
White Plains, NY 10601
Telephone: (914) 285-0700
Facsimile: (914) 285-1213
E-mail: jrenzulli@renzullilaw.com
crenzulli@renzullilaw.com
hschilsky@renzullilaw.com
- and -
Paul G. Cereghini, Esq.
Lauren O. Miller, Esq.
Carissa Casolari, Esq.
BOWMAN AND BROOKE LLP
1741 Technology Drive, Suite 200
San Jose, CA 95110
Telephone: (408) 279-5393
Facsimile: (408) 279-5845
E-mail: paul.cereghini@bowmanandbrooke.com
lauren.miller@bowmanandbrooke.com
Carissa.casolari@bowmanandbrooke.com
GREEN OLIVE INC: Jimenez Alleges Several Labor Law Violations
-------------------------------------------------------------
ARMANDO HERNANDEZ JIMENEZ, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GREEN OLIVE INC. and MOHAMED NAJI
SALEH, as an individual, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-08805
(E.D.N.Y., November 30, 2023) alleges violations of the Fair Labor
Standards Act and the New York Labor Law.
Plaintiff Armando Hernandez Jimenez was employed by Green Olive
Inc. as a food preparer, cook, cleaner, and stocker while
performing related miscellaneous duties for the Defendants, from in
or around August 2022 until in or around July 2023. Throughout his
employment, he was regularly required to work approximately 52
hours each week. However, the Defendants did not pay Plaintiff time
and a half for hours worked over 40, a blatant violation of the
overtime provisions contained in the FLSA and NYLL. Among others,
the Defendants also failed to provide Plaintiff with an accurate
wage statement that included all hours worked and all wages
received each week when Plaintiff was paid in violation of the
NYLL.
Green Olive Inc. is a domestic business corporation organized under
the laws of New York with a principal executive office at 80-45 Kew
Gardens Road, Rd 3, Kew Gardens, NY. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Roman Avshalumov, Esq.
HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601
Kew Gardens, NY 11415
Telephone: (718) 263-9591
Facsimile: (718) 263-9598
HERITAGE VALLEY: Appeals Remand Ruling in Doe Wiretapping Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Heritage Valley Health System Inc., et al., filed an appeal from
the District Court's Order dated October 19, 2023 entered in the
lawsuit entitled John Doe, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Heritage Valley Health System, Inc. et al.,
Case No. 2-23-cv-01044, in the United States District Court for the
Western District of Pennsylvania.
As reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit was removed
from the Court of Common Pleas of Beaver County, Pennsylvania to
the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on
June 8, 2023. The case arises from the Defendants' alleged unlawful
wiretapping and invasion of privacy by installing third-party
source code for the Meta Pixel on Heritage Valley's public
website.
On July 3, 2023, the Plaintiff filed a motion to remand the case
which the Court granted on October 19 through an Order entered by
Judge W. Scott Hardy.
The appellate case is captioned as Heritage Valley Health System
Inc, et al. v. John Doe, Case No. 23-3033, in the United States
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, filed on November 22,
2023.[BN]
Defendants-Appellants HERITAGE VALLEY HEALTH SYSTEM INC, DBA
Heritage Valley Sewickley Hospital, DBA Heritage Valley Beaver
Hospital, DBA Heritage Valley Kennedy Hospital; and HERITAGE VALLEY
MULTISPECIALTY GROUP INC., are represented by:
Carrie H. Dettmer Slye, Esq.
BAKER & HOSTETLER
312 Walnut Street, Suite 3200
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Telephone: (513) 852-2626
Plaintiff-Appellee JOHN DOE, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, is represented by:
George A. Bochetto, Esq.
BOCHETTO & LENTZ
1524 Locust Street
Philadelphia, PA 19102
Telephone: (215) 735-3900
HOLLY RIDGE: Tenants File Health Hazard Class Action
----------------------------------------------------
Nikolai Mather, writing for WHQR, reports that group of tenants is
bringing legal action against the town of Holly Ridge and
Pendergraph Management, which managed Holly Plaza, the town's
public housing complex.
Former residents of the public housing complex Holly Plaza are now
taking legal action against the town of Holly Ridge in federal
court.
On Nov. 27, a group of tenants filed a class action suit in North
Carolina's Eastern district. They're suing the town of Holly Ridge,
the Holly Ridge Housing Authority, property managers Pendergraph
Management, and various contractors who did work on the complex
over the years.
The lead plaintiff for the case is Briana Paull, a single mother
who has lived at Holly Plaza since 2020. The suit makes several
allegations about her experiences. Paull stated that her complaints
about mold date back to last year. She alleges that both Holly
Ridge and Pendergraph Management ignored many of these complaints.
She alleged that Pendergraph Management failed to inform her of the
health hazards in her house. The suit stated that in December 2022,
Pendergraph sent an inspector to her apartment to test for mold.
Paull alleges that Pendergraph told her that her apartment was
safe, but refused to share the test results.
Paull also alleges that Pendergraph failed to properly remediate
mold growth. The suit states that in January 2023, a contractor
removed the sheetrock from her walls and found mold growing on her
studs. According to Paull, Pendergraph ordered the company to spray
an unknown chemical on the studs and replace the sheetrock. The
following month, Paull reportedly found mushrooms growing from her
walls. Another contractor recommended opening up her walls to
inspect for mold. Paull said Pendergraph rejected this
recommendation.
The suit states that Paull and her children are suffering major
health issues as a result of living under hazardous conditions. One
of her daughters is allegedly using a nebulizer to help with severe
asthma, which Paull said has worsened since moving to the
apartment.
The plaintiffs are bringing several counts against the defendants,
including: breach of contract, breach of warranty of habitability,
unfair and deceptive trade practices, negligence, and temporary
recurrent private nuisance. They are also asking for punitive
damages against the town of Holly Ridge and Pendergraph.
The plaintiffs did not indicate the exact monetary amount they're
asking for, but given the jurisdiction, it will likely exceed $5
million.
The defendants have 21 days to issue a legal answer or
counterclaim.
WHQR reached out to Pendergraph Management, the town of Holly
Ridge, and attorneys representing the former tenants. Tenant
attorneys and Pendergraph Management have not yet responded, but on
Dec. 1, Mayor Jeff Wenzel of Holly Ridge issued the following
statement to WHQR: "We have been notified of the lawsuit. The
Town's attorneys are reviewing it." [GN]
INSTADOSE PHARMA: Feb. 14 Class Action Opt-Out Deadline Set
-----------------------------------------------------------
To all persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired
publicly traded Instadose Pharma Corp. ("Instadose") securities
from July 14, 2021, through November 24, 2021, both dates inclusive
(collectively, the "Class", and individually "Class Members").
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure and an order of the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Virginia (the "Court"), that you may be
a member of a class action pending in the Court. The lawsuit
captioned DeLuca v. Instadose Pharma Corp., et al., Case No.
2:21-cv-00675, has been certified by the Court as a class action on
behalf of the Class defined above. Please note that at this time,
there is no judgment, settlement, or monetary recovery, and there
is no guarantee there will be any recovery.
This case began in December 2021 and alleges claims under Sections
10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule
10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The Action alleges that Defendants
made material misrepresentations and omissions during the Class
Period about due diligence performed into the business combination
of Instadose with a Canadian-based cannabis producer. The Action is
ongoing, but Defendants have failed to answer the complaint or make
an appearance and therefore a renewed motion for default judgment
will be filed pursuant to the Court's order.
IF YOU ARE A CLASS MEMBER, YOUR RIGHTS WILL BE AFFECTED BY THIS
ACTION. A Postcard Notice is currently being mailed to known
potential Class Members. If you have not received a Postcard
Notice, you may obtain a copy of it or the long-form Notice by
downloading them from Class Counsel's website at
www.bespc.com/cases/InstadosePharma-SecuritiesLitigation or
contacting the Administrator at:
Instadose Securities Litigation
c/o RG/2 Claims Administration LLC
P.O. Box 59479
Philadelphia, PA 19102-9479
info@rg2claims.com
1-866-742-4955
Inquiries, other than requests for the notices, may be made to
Class Counsel at:
Lawrence P. Eagel
BRAGAR EAGEL & SQUIRE, P.C.
810 Seventh Avenue, Suite 620
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: 212/308-5858
www.bespc.com
At this time, Class Members are not required to take any action to
remain in the Class other than retain documentation reflecting
transactions and holdings in Instadose securities. If any benefits
are eventually obtained for the Class as a result of this lawsuit,
eligible Class Members may be entitled to a payment.
Class Members may choose to exclude themselves from the Class. If
you exclude yourself, you will not be entitled to a payment if any
benefits are eventually obtained for the Class. If you do not
exclude yourself, you will be bound by any judgment in this
litigation, whether favorable or unfavorable. To request exclusion,
you must submit a written request for exclusion postmarked no later
than February 14, 2024, in accordance with instructions set forth
in the long-form Notice available at
www.bespc.com/cases/InstadosePharma-SecuritiesLitigation.
Class Members are represented by Class Counsel. Class Members may
also enter an appearance through an attorney if the member so
desires. If you do, your attorney must file a notice of appearance
with the Court on or before February 14, 2024.
This notice is only a summary. For more information please visit:
www.bespc.com/cases/InstadosePharma-SecuritiesLitigation .
PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE COURT REGARDING THIS NOTICE
Contacts
Lawrence P. Eagel
BRAGAR EAGEL & SQUIRE, P.C.
810 Seventh Avenue, Suite 620
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: 212/308-5858
www.bespc.com [GN]
JANSSEN INC: Lawyer Suggests BC Opioid Suit Too Big to Certify
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Canadian Press reports that holding a single trial in British
Columbia to determine damages for each province and territory
related to opioid health-care costs would be a "monster of
complexity," one of the dozens of lawyers for pharmaceutical firms
told a court on Nov. 29.
Gordon McKee, a lawyer for Janssen Inc. and Johnson & Johnson, told
the B.C. Supreme Court that certifying Canadian governments as a
class in their pursuit of damages against opioid makers isn't
manageable or preferable compared with separate trials.
He said the province's claims that a class action is about
"efficiency" isn't enough to certify a class comprising governments
that would have ended up suing the defendants regardless of the
B.C. government's legal action.
"This is not a proposed class action by persons who were prescribed
opioids and had an adverse experience and might have difficulty
accessing the justice system," he said. "This is pure and simple a
claim for money by well-funded, sophisticated litigants who don't
need a class action to access the justice system."
McKee told Justice Michael Brundrett that he should not certify
Canadian governments as a class in the case because it would
"burden" B.C.'s justice system and have a negative effect on access
to justice for other potential litigants.
He said the "individual issues" at stake are "substantial,"
requiring trials that may take months or years to resolve since
it's likely that any decisions made by the court will be subject to
appeals.
McKee said other courts in the past have recognized that some
class-action lawsuits are "too big to certify," and there are
enough separate issues in each province or territory that would
make a single trial unmanageable.
"This is one of those cases," he said.
Individual trials specific to each jurisdiction would be more
suited and "appropriately spreads the burden" of the complex issues
among provincial and territorial justice systems, he said.
McKee told the court that there are complex claims against
different defendants, and their significance is paramount to assess
if the province meets its burden to show a class action is the best
way to move forward.
He said the government has to show "with evidence, that a class
action of this enormous scope and breadth is manageable, rather
than a monster of complexity, as we say it is, and preferable to
individual lawsuits by and in each province."
"Individual trials have been the norm, just and fair way to resolve
disputes for a very long time," he said. "They're the default."
Opioid maker Purdue Canada agreed last June to settle in a B.C.-led
effort to recover health-care costs in the sale and marketing of
opioid-based pain medicines.
The company agreed to pay $150 million in cash and additional
benefits, including access to information and documents relevant to
the lawsuit, and the settlement was approved by the federal and all
provincial and territorial governments.
Andrew Borrell, a lawyer for defendant Sandoz Canada, told the
court that the B.C. government could have launched legal actions in
a more "narrow" fashion, targeting specific products and their
makers.
The province, he said, made a choice to pursue the case with a wide
"scope" by bringing a single action "in relation to 50 defendants,
all opioids and all conduct over a period of 30 years."
"The province has to live with that choice in relation to the
implications that it means for certification," he said. "Not all
defendants made all opioids. Different combinations of defendants
made different opioid products at different times."
Borrell said class actions can be found "unsuitable" for
certification for a number of reasons, if they're too big and
unmanageable in terms of fairness or efficiency, or if there are
"other processes available that are preferable."
"In other words, can you do it all?" he asked the judge.
On Nov. 27, a lawyer for the B.C. government asked the court to
certify the class allowing provinces and territories to join their
claims against the dozens of defendant companies, saying the
actions are nearly identical claiming health-care costs related to
the opioid crisis that has killed or injured thousands of
Canadians.
The certification hearing is expected to last several weeks. [GN]
JPMORGAN CHASE: Faces Sylvain Suit Over FCCPA Violations
--------------------------------------------------------
JONATHAN SYLVAIN, individually and on behalf of all those similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. JPMORGAN CHASE & CO., Defendant, Case No.
CACE-23-021773 (Fla. Cir., 17th Judicial, Broward Cty., November
30, 2023) alleges violations of the Florida Consumer Collection
Practices Act.
On April 19, 2023, the Defendant allegedly sent an electronic mail
communication to Plaintiff at 9:06:34 PM in Plaintiff's time zone.
The communication attempted to collect a consumer debt but was
unlawfully sent between 9:00 PM and 8:00 AM, says the suit.
Headquartered in New York, JPMorgan Chase & Co. is a financial
services firm. It is considered as the largest bank in the United
States. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq.
Jennifer G. Simil, Esq.
Gerald D. Lane, Jr. Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 907-1136
E-mail: jibrael@jibraellaw.com
jen@jibraellaw.com
gerald@jibraellaw.com
JUSTWATCH INC: Fuhrhop & Leslie Sue Over Disclosure of Private Info
-------------------------------------------------------------------
COREY FUHRHOP and JAMES LESLIE, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. JUSTWATCH, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-12923 (D. Mass., November 30, 2023)
alleges violations of the federal Video Privacy Protection Act.
The Plaintiffs bring this class action against Just Watch for
violating Plaintiffs' privacy rights under federal law by knowingly
disclosing consumers' personally identifiable information,
including information which identifies a person as having requested
or obtained specific video materials or services from a video tape
provider, through the use of a hidden tracking code created by Meta
Platforms, Inc.
JustWatch develops, owns, and operates an online video request and
streaming platform called "JustWatch.com" that allows consumers to
easily find out where to watch their favorite movies & TV shows in
the United States. JustWatch users can access thousands of movies
and other video content from their computer, mobile device, or
other video streaming device. Unbeknownst to Plaintiffs and members
of the Class, Defendant knowingly and intentionally discloses its
users' video viewing history every time they request or watch video
content on JustWatch.com, says the suit.
Headquartered in Boston, MA, Just Watch is in the business of
delivering prerecorded digital video content and owns and operates
the JustWatch digital video platform. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Raymond P. Ausrotas, Esq.
William F. McGonigle, Esq.
ARROWOOD LLP
10 Post Office Square, 7th Floor South
Boston, MA 02109
Telephone: (617) 849-6200
Facsimile: (617) 849-6201
E-mail: rausrotas@arrowoodllp.com
wmcgonigle@arrowoodllp.com
- and -
Eric S. Dwoskin, Esq.
DWOSKIN WASDIN LLP
433 Plaza Real, Suite 275
Boca Raton, FL 33432
Telephone: (561) 849-8060
E-mail: edwoskin@dwowas.com
KELLY SERVICES: Brown Labor Suit Removed to N.D. Cal.
-----------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as LEONARD BROWN, individually, and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. KELLY SERVICES GLOBAL,
LLC, a limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,
Defendants, Case No. C23-02469, was removed from the Superior Court
of the State of California, County of Contra Costa, to the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California on
November 21, 2023.
The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of California assigned
Case No. 3:23-cv-06025 to the proceeding.
The Plaintiff bases his claims on alleged violations of the
California Labor Code. Specifically, Plaintiff claims that Kelly
violated the Labor Code by: (1) failing to pay Plaintiff and the
putative class members minimum wages and straight time wages for
time worked; (2) failing to pay Plaintiff and the putative class
members overtime wages for time worked; (3) failing to provide
Plaintiff and the putative class members with meal periods in
accordance with California law; (4) failing to provide Plaintiff
and the putative class members with rest periods in accordance with
California law; (5) failing to timely pay Plaintiff and the
putative class members wages owed at separation; (6) failing to
provide Plaintiff and the putative class members with accurate
itemized wage statements; (7) failing to indemnify Plaintiff and
the putative class members for necessary business expenses; (8)
unfair competition.
Kelly Services Global, LLC provides staffing and workforce
solutions in the U.S.[BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Nick Baltaxe, Esq.
DUANE MORRIS LLP
865 South Figueroa Street, Suite 3100
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Telephone: (213) 689-7400
Facsimile: (213) 689-7401
E-mail: nbaltaxe@duanemorris.com
- and -
Gerald L. Maatman, Esq.
Jennifer A. Riley, Esq.
DUANE MORRIS LLP
190 S. LaSalle Street, Suite 3700
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: (312) 499-6700
Facsimile: (312) 279-6780
E-mail: gmaatman@duanemorris.com
jariley@duanemorris.com
- and -
Shireen Y. Wetmore, Esq.
Eisha Perry, Esq.
DUANE MORRIS LLP
Spear Tower One Market Plaza, Suite 2200
San Francisco, CA 94105-1127
Telephone: (415) 957-3000
Facsimile: (415) 957-3001
E-mail: sywetmore@duanemorris.com
eperry@duanemorris.com
LAKE COUNTY, IL: Settles Class Action Over Jail Conditions
----------------------------------------------------------
Montana Public Radio reports that Lake County has settled a
class-action lawsuit over conditions inside its jail. The Lake
County Jail will construct new housing units and an outdoor
recreation area.
The class action settlement between inmates at the jail and Lake
County was approved by a federal court in Missoula this week. In
the settlement, Lake County denied any wrongdoing, but agreed to
the terms.
Constance Van Kley, one of the attorneys representing inmates, said
lack of expansion left the 90-year-old jail overcrowded and
unsanitary.
"When the jail was initially built, there weren't nearly the same
number of inmates that there are today," Kley said.
With more inmates than cells, the indoor recreation room was
converted to housing. Inmates were stuck in their cells for 24
hours a day.
Van Kley said the new housing and recreation space will improve
conditions.
"This means that inmates will have a daily opportunity to exercise,
as well as to go outdoors and see the sun and, you know, breathe
fresh air," Kley said.
Lake County also agreed to pay attorney's fees and provide
traditional religious counseling for Native American inmates. Van
Kley said roughly half of the jail roster are Indigenous.
The Lake County Attorney did not immediately return MTPR's request
for comment. [GN]
LGI HOMES: McAlister Wage-and-Hour Suit Removed to D. Colo.
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as RIKKI MCALISTER, individually and on behalf of
all similarly situated persons, Plaintiff v. LGI Homes Corporate,
LLC, Defendant, Case No. 2023-cv-30960, was removed from the
District Court for Arapahoe County, Colorado to the United States
District Court for the District of Colorado on November 21, 2023.
The Clerk of Court for the District of Colorado assigned Case No.
1:23-cv-03088 to the proceeding.
In the Complaint, Plaintiff, on behalf of herself and putative
class members, asserted the following claims for relief: (1)
failure to pay overtime compensation in violation of the Colorado
Wage Act; (2) failure to provide compensated rest periods in
violation of the Colorado Wage Act; (3) improper deductions in
violation of the Colorado Wage Act; (4) failure to pay overtime
compensation in violation of the Colorado Minimum Wages of Workers
Act; and (5) failure to provide compensated rest period in
violation of the Colorado Minimum Wages of Workers Act.
LGI Homes Corporate, LLC is an American construction company that
is known for building homes and housing developments.[BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Vance O. Knapp, Esq.
Patrick J. Collopy, Esq.
FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP
1125 17th Street, Suite 2400
Denver, CO 80202
Telephone: (303) 218-3650
Facsimile: (303) 218-3651
E-mail: vknapp@fisherphillips.com
pcollopy@fisherphillips.com
LIBERTY MUTUAL: Watts Sues Over Transportation Expenses Coverage
----------------------------------------------------------------
DIANE WATTS, ANTHONY WATTS, and ADAM PIZZITOLA, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. LIBERTY
MUTUAL PERSONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, LIBERTY MUTUAL GROUP, INC., LMHC
MASSACHUSETTS HOLDINGS, INC., and LIBERTY MUTUAL HOLDING COMPANY,
INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-12845-PBS (D. Mass., November
21, 2023) is a class action lawsuit for breach of contract,
vexatious refusal to pay, and insurance bad faith against the
Defendants in connection with Liberty Mutual's standard practice of
prematurely terminating Transportation Expenses Coverage benefits
when it declares a vehicle a total loss.
According to the complaint, Liberty Mutual sells automobile
insurance policies that include optional coverage for
"Transportation Expenses." Transportation Expenses Coverage is
intended to reimburse an insured for transportation expenses such
as the cost of a rental car, while an insured's own automobile is
not available after a covered insurance claim. In breach of its
insurance policy, when Liberty Mutual determines that a vehicle is
a total loss, it does not evaluate the amount of time "reasonably
required" for an insured to replace the totaled vehicle. Instead,
Liberty Mutual systematically places an arbitrary cap on the length
of time it pays Transportation Expenses Coverage, says the suit.
The Plaintiffs seek to represent a Class and/or Subclasses of all
insureds who have suffered similar injury when Liberty Mutual
arbitrarily and prematurely terminated Transportation Expenses
Coverage, and to recover all damages and losses owed to them.
Liberty Mutual Personal Insurance Company is a property and
casualty insurance company.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Julie Selesnick, Esq.
BERGER MONTAGUE PC
2001 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 300
Washington D.C. 20006
Telephone: (202) 221-5279
Facsimile: (215) 875-4604
E-mail: jselesnick@bm.net
- and -
Shanon Carson, Esq.
Y. Michael Twersky, Esq.
BERGER MONTAGUE PC
1818 Market Street, Suite 3600
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 875-4656
E-mail: scarson@bm.net
mitwersky@bm.net
- and -
John G. Albanese, Esq.
BERGER MONTAGUE PC
1229 Tyler Street NE, Suite 205
Minneapolis, MN 55413
Telephone: (612) 594-5999
E-mail: jalbanese@bm.net
- and -
Richard M. Ochroch, Esq.
Brett N. Benton, Esq.
Andrew R. Ochroch, Esq.
RICHARD M. OCHROCH & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
318 S. 16th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19102
Telephone: (215) 735-2707
E-mail: rochroch@ochroch-law.com
bbenton@ochroch-law.com
aochroch@ochroch-law.com
LOANDEPOT.COM LLC: Court Narrows Claims in Smith Suit
-----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jonathan Smith, v.
loanDepot.com, LLC, Case No. 2:22-cv-01674-GMS (D. Ariz.), the Hon.
Judge G. Murray Snow entered an order granting in part and denying
in part the Defendant's motion to Dismiss the Plaintiff's
Complaint.
The Court further entered an order denying the Defendant's Motion
to Strike Class Allegations from Plaintiff's Complaint, Motion to
Bifurcate Discovery, and Motion to Stay Discovery.
LoanDepot is an Irvine, California-based nonbank holding company
which sells mortgage and non-mortgage lending products.
A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 27, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3t6IWQv at no extra
charge.[CC]
MARTIAN SALES: Kratom Power Contains Opioid Receptors, Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
C.M.; and M.C., individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. MARTIAN SALES, INC., Defendant, Case No.
3:23-cv-06202-SK (N.D. Cal., Nov. 30, 2023) is an action against
the Defendant for false, misleading, deceptive, and negligent sales
practices regarding its kratom powder, capsule, and liquid extract
products (the "Products").
According to the complaint, the Defendant fails to disclose the
"active ingredients" in kratom are similar to opioids. That is,
kratom works on the exact same opioid receptors in the human brain
as morphine and its analogs, has similar effects as such, and
critically, has the same risk of physical addiction and dependency,
with similar withdrawal symptoms.
The Defendant's conduct has injured Plaintiffs and the California
Subclass they seek to represent in that they paid money for a
product that they would not have purchased or paid more than they
would have but for Defendant's failure to disclose the addictive
nature of its Products, the suit says.
MARTIAN SALES, INC. sells natural health products, such as herbal
extracts, capsule, tablet or liquid forms. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Neal J. Deckant, Esq.
Luke Sironski-White, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 300-4455
Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
Email: ndeckant@bursor.com
lsironski@bursor.com
MARTINEZ REFINING: Faces Suit Over Coke Dusts' Health Effects
-------------------------------------------------------------
Bay City News reports that two Martinez residents filed a proposed
class action lawsuit against Martinez Refining Company, alleging
the refinery has created a "public nuisance" by releasing chemicals
into the surrounding community.
Martinez residents Alena Cruz and Shannon Payne filed the suit on
Nov. 28 in Contra Costa County Superior Court against the Martinez
Refining Company LLC, PBF Energy Inc., and PBF Energy Western
Region LLC.
"It seems like there are these issues and they are not really
telling us what the problem is and why it is happening," Cruz said.
"It makes me think they might be hiding something and it is
definitely not good for us whatever it is."
Joe Cotchett, a partner at the law firm representing the
plaintiffs, said in a statement, "After years of obfuscation and
secrecy surrounding the refinery, finally the federal government,
including the FBI is looking into this extremely concerning
situation."
On Thanksgiving night in 2022, the refinery released an estimated
20 to 24 tons of "spent catalyst" into the surrounding community
until the following morning, when residents found their yards and
vehicles covered in metallic dust.
The refinery failed to alert the county health department and the
community warning system, both of which are legally mandated within
15 minutes of a release.
"They didn't let the people know immediately what was going on,"
said Blair Kittle, one of the lawyers representing the plaintiffs.
"They didn't take action to stop it."
County health officials didn't find out about the release until the
following Saturday when alerted to social media posts about the
dust. Initial testing of the Thanksgiving release showed the dust
contained elevated levels of aluminum, barium, chromium, nickel,
vanadium and zinc, all of which can cause respiratory problems.
Since the Thanksgiving release, there's been at least three smaller
releases of "coke dust" since July. Coke dust is a byproduct of oil
refining. The first release, on July 11, lasted less than a minute
and created steam with coke dust, which was carried into the
community by wind.
The second release was on July 22 and was contained on-site. The
third release happened Oct. 6 and was termed by refinery officials
as "brief" in a unit that has since been taken offline.
Nevertheless, all three incidents are still being investigated. The
Thanksgiving 2022 release is being investigated by the Contra Costa
County District Attorney's Office.
Lead plaintiff Cruz said she has health problems. She fears more
incidents from the refinery will damage her health.
"I have a health condition which affects my breathing," she said.
"I am even more concerned about that. Like, if the air is bad, how
bad is it for me with my health condition?"
An MRC spokesperson said on Nov. 29 the company doesn't comment on
pending litigation.
The refinery has publicly apologized to the city, saying it wasn't
aware of any public impact until the day after the Thanksgiving
release and that it's taken corrective actions to make sure similar
releases don't happen in the future.
The suit asks MRC to pay for medical monitoring expenses for
affected individuals to ensure that any potential negative health
effects from the toxic releases are identified and treated. [GN]
META PLATFORMS: Alpena School Joins Suit Over Addictive Platforms
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Gonzalez, writing for The Alpena News, reports that The Alpena
Public Schools Board of Education agreed to sign on to a nationwide
class-action lawsuit against social media companies Facebook,
Instagram, YouTube, Snapchat, and TikTok for causing addiction and
mental health problems in children and teens.
According to the lawsuit, the platforms and their parent companies
cause mental health issues in adolescents such as anxiety,
depression, suicidal ideations, and more.
APS Superintendent David Rabbideau said that a key reason why the
district wanted to join was because of the "countless negative
impacts" the district has seen in students.
"I remember there was a TikTok trend where it was recording
yourself vandalizing school property," Rabbideau said. "Compared to
other school districts, we were lucky enough to only have minor
damages during that time."
Social media company heads have denied any wrongdoing and said in
fact their standards discourage use of their platforms by young
teens and that they've implemented numerous tools to help teens and
families, such as automatic time limits for teen users.
The use of social media among teens is nearly universal in the U.S.
and many other parts of the world. Almost all teens ages 13 to 17
in the U.S. report using a social media platform, with about a
third saying they use social media "almost constantly," according
to the Pew Research Center.
Joining class-action lawsuits is not new to APS, as they joined one
against JUUL and other vape manufacturers. The district accepted
money from settlements with JUUL and Altria Co. and used the
undisclosed amount of funds to offset the cost of the schools' vape
detectors.
Rabbideau said that, if the social media lawsuit sees a settlement,
the district would use the money to create a better educational
program to show the downsides of social media.
"We've really implemented our phone guidelines this year so kids
don't use their phones during normal school hours," Rabbideau said.
"We're seeing benefits with this. Students are interacting more
with students and teachers. We are not seeing nearly the levels of
conflict between students, as most of that conflict can happen on
social media and on phones."
According to the APS student handbook, elementary students can have
a phone, but it must be put away and powered off.
Middle school students can use their phones during lunch hours, but
must have it powered off before and afterward.
High school students can leave their phones on, but may only use
them between class periods and during lunch hours.
"The crux of it is that there are countless negative impacts from
social media," Rabbideau said. "These companies are targeting
minors with their marketing and hurting the mental health of the
students, whose brains are still developing. Let's right the
wrongs."
The Associated Press contributed to this report. [GN]
MONTCLAIR CAR: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Galdamez Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------
ANA GALDAMEZ, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. MONTCLAIR CAR CARE INC and "JOHN DOE",
Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-22793 (D.N.J., November 30, 2023)
seeks to recover unpaid minimum wages and overtime compensation for
Plaintiff under the Federal Labor Standards Act and the New Jersey
State Wage and Hour Law.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as a car washer and car
detailer from on or about April 2022 until October 2023 at the
Defendant's business located at 4 Bloomfield Ave Montclair, NJ. He
was allegedly paid $11 per hour and was not paid any overtime
despite working approximately 70 hours per week.
Based in New Jersey, Montclair Car Care Inc provides car washing
and auto detailing services. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lina Stillman, Esq.
STILLMAN LEGAL P.C
42 Broadway, 12th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 203-2417
Website: www.stillmanlegalpc.com
MULKAY CARDIOLOGY: Faces Doe Suit Over Unprotected Patients' Info
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JANE DOE, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. MULKAY CARDIOLOGY CONSULTANTS, P.C., and MULKAY
CARDIOLOGY CONSULTANTS AT HOLY NAME MEDICAL CENTER, P.C.,
Defendants, Case No. BER-L-006451-23 (N.J. Super., Bergen Cty.,
November 30, 2023) is a class action against the against the
Defendants for negligence, negligence per se, breach of implied
contract, unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of
confidence, and declaratory judgment arising from their failure to
properly secure and safeguard Plaintiff's and other similarly
situated Mulkay Cardiology patients' personally identifiable
information and protected health information from criminal hackers.
On or about November 3, 2023, Mulkay Cardiology filed official
notice of a hacking incident with the Maine Office of the Attorney
General. Its investigation revealed that an unauthorized party had
access to certain files that contained sensitive patient
information, and that such access took place between September 1,
2023, and September 5, 2023.
Based in Hackensack, NJ, Mulkay Cardiology is comprised of three
private medical clinics providing various cardiovascular health
care services that serve more than 79,000 patients in New Jersey.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jack Spitz, Esq.
Mason A. Barney, Esq.
Tyler J. Bean, Esq.
SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Telephone: (212) 532-1091
E-mail: jspitz@sirillp.com
mbarney@sirillp.com
tbean@sirillp.com
NATIONAL INSTRUMENTS: Lead Plaintiff Bid Deadline Set for Jan. 29
-----------------------------------------------------------------
WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces
the filing of a class action lawsuit on behalf of sellers of common
stock of National Instruments Corporation (NASDAQ: NATI) between
May 25, 2022 and January 17, 2023, both dates inclusive (the "Class
Period"). A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you
wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later
than January 29, 2024.
SO WHAT: If you sold National Instruments common stock during the
Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of
any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee
arrangement.
WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the National Instruments class action, go
to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=20784 or call
Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email
pkim@rosenlegal.com or cases@rosenlegal.com for information on the
class action. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you
wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later
than January 29, 2024. A lead plaintiff is a representative party
acting on behalf of other class members in directing the
litigation.
WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel
with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms
issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources or any
meaningful peer recognition. Be wise in selecting counsel. The
Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the
largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese
Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class
Action Services for number of securities class action settlements
in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013
and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In
2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In
2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a
Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been
recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.
DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, during the Class
Period, defendants made false statements and/or omitted to disclose
material information that artificially deflated the price of
National Instruments common stock. The lawsuit alleges that at the
time that National Instruments was repurchasing National
Instruments stock, defendants knew that National Instruments had
received a formal acquisition offer from Emerson Electric Co.
Accordingly, National Instruments had an obligation to disclose
that it had received a formal acquisition offer from Emerson or
abstain from purchasing National Instruments stock from
unsuspecting investors.
To join the National Instruments class action, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=20784 or call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email pkim@rosenlegal.com or
cases@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action.
No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are
not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select
counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member
and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any
potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead
plaintiff.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.
Contacts
Laurence Rosen, Esq.
Phillip Kim, Esq.
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Tel: (212) 686-1060
Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
Fax: (212) 202-3827
lrosen@rosenlegal.com
pkim@rosenlegal.com
cases@rosenlegal.com
www.rosenlegal.com [GN]
NEW HAMPSHIRE: Must Face Class Action Over Administration of CFI
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Feely, writing for New Hampshire Union Leader, reports that a
U.S. District Court judge said a lawsuit claiming a state-run
program makes it more likely seniors and those with disabilities
will end up in nursing institutions may proceed as a class action.
In January 2021, the New Hampshire Legal Assistance, Disabilities
Rights Center and AARP Foundation sued the Department of Health and
Human Services over administration of its Choice for Independence
program (CFI). [GN]
NEWARK, NJ: Settles Police Cadets' Labor Class Action for $4MM
--------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Strunsky, writing for nj.com, reports that the City of Newark
has agreed to pay $4 million to more than 190 former police cadets
to settle a federal class action suit charging they worked unpaid
overtime at their training academy in 2017 and 2018, according to
court documents and the plaintiffs' lawyer.
At the same time, a related whistleblower suit in state court is
headed for arbitration after being filed by a Newark detective,
charging he was the victim of retaliation from superiors for his
role in the class action suit.
A settlement hearing in the class action is scheduled for Jan. 4,
according to an order by federal Magistrate Judge Jose R. Almonte
of U.S. District Court in Newark in response to a request by both
sides in the case.
John C. Luke Jr., who represents the officers, told NJ Advance
Media that he and his clients looked forward to finalizing the
settlement, which the judge must approve.
"We are currently awaiting preliminary approval from the court,
which will take place on Jan. 4, 2024," Luke said in an email.
"This was a particularly satisfying result for the former cadets. I
believe that both sides are happy with this result."
Cheyne R. Scott., the city's outside counsel, declined to comment
on the proposed settlement, referring questions to the city.
Newark's top in-house lawyer, Corporation Counsel Kenyatta Stewart,
also declined to comment on the settlement, which Law360 previously
reported.
The class action suit was filed against the City of Newark by three
named plaintiffs, Malikul Aziz, Ronnie Cruz, and Rudan Ramshani,
all former Newark cadets who attended the New Jersey State Police
Training Academy in Sea Girt. Aziz and Cruz attended the academy in
2017, and Ramshani attended in 2018. They filed the suit on their
behalf and the behalf of over 190 other cadets in their graduating
classes.
The suit charges that, as the cadets' employer, the city violated
the federal Fair Labor Standards Act by failing to pay them
overtime for work they did during their 16-week stints at the
academy, where they bunked from Monday morning through Friday
night.
The suit charges that the cadets were paid $17.50 an hour for a
40-hour week of training but unpaid for up to an additional 8 hours
a day they worked cleaning and maintaining their barracks, showers
and other areas of the academy.
"Following their scheduled shifts, Defendant required Plaintiffs to
work beyond their scheduled shift times on a regular basis and
failed to pay them for such time," states the complaint, filed Aug.
11, 2020.
In a response filed by Scott that October, the city admitted having
employed the plaintiffs as cadets but denied the allegations of
unpaid wages.
Spokespeople for Newark Mayor Ras J. Baraka and the Department of
Public Safety, which includes the police force, declined to comment
on either suit. Anthony Ambrose was Newark's public safety director
from 2016 to 2021 but is not named in the suit and declined to
comment.
Baraka, elected in 2014, and Ambrose, whom the mayor appointed two
years later, presided over hiring hundreds of officers, including
many of the former cadets involved in the class action suit.
Aziz filed the whistleblower suit in Newark Superior Court in June
2022 and amended it that December. Aziz, now a Newark detective,
was president of his cadet class and, as a rookie officer in 2018,
received a departmental medal of honor for rescuing a drowning
2-year-old child, according to the suit.
The suit says the department retaliated against Aziz for his
participation in the class action by, among other actions,
confiscating his firearm ahead of tryouts for Newark's SWAT team,
rendering him unable to participate and depriving him of the chance
to join an elite unit that would enhance his standing and career
opportunities.
The suit asserts that after the class action's filing, "the
Department served Plaintiff with a preliminary notice of
Disciplinary Action, alleging a number of purported violations of
the Department Rules and Regulations." The suit said the department
suspended Aziz but later reinstated him.
The suit states that the disciplinary action notice was served on
Aziz two days after a captain in the department requested his
personnel records related to the class action.
The suit demands compensatory and punitive damages for back pay,
missed career opportunities, emotional distress and other
consequences of the alleged retaliation.
Aziz referred questions to his lawyer in the whistleblower suit,
Steven A. Varano, who did not respond to a request for comment. The
city's response to the whistleblower suit denied the assertions.
Scott, who filed the response on March 10, declined to comment.
The period during which Aziz alleges retaliation predates Newark's
current public safety director, Fritz Fragé. The director at the
time was Brian O'Hara, who left the city last year to become
Minneapolis' chief of police. A spokesman for O'Hara, who is not
named in the suit, declined to comment.
No arbitration session has been scheduled in the case.
Stewart, Newark's corporation counsel, said the city was open to
the arbitration process.
"The city is always willing to talk to people and to hear what they
have to say," he said. [GN]
OMELAGAH INC: Lewis Labor Suit Removed to N.D. Cal.
---------------------------------------------------
The case styled as CARMANEISHA LEWIS, individual, and on behalf of
other members of the general public similarly situated, Plaintiff
v. OMELAGAH, INC., a California corporation; and DOES 1 through
100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 23CV044580, was removed from
the Superior Court of California, County of Alameda to the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California on
November 21, 2023.
The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of California assigned
Case No. 3:23-cv-06037-AGT to the proceeding.
In the complaint, Plaintiff alleges, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated, 10 total causes of action, nine of which
are for various violations of the California Labor Code and one for
"Unfair Competition" under the California Business & Professions
Code.
Omelagah, Inc. is a family-owned disability services company.[BN]
Defendant Omelagah, Inc. is represented by:
Douglas J. Melton, Esq.
Shane M. Cahill, Esq.
LONG & LEVIT LLP
465 California Street, Suite 500
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (415) 397-2222
Facsimile: (415) 397-6392
E-mail: dmelton@longlevit.com
scahill@longlevit.com
PRIORITY WORKFORCE: Faces Tux Wage-and-Hour Suit in Calif.
----------------------------------------------------------
MATEO ICH TUX, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PRIORITY WORKFORCE, LLC, a Limited Liability
Company; SANTOSHI CORPORATION dba ALUM-A-COAT, a Corporation; and
DOES 1-20, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 23B BCV02771 (Cal.
Super., Los Angeles Cty., Nov. 22, 2023) arises from the
Defendants' alleged violation of the California Labor Code and the
California Business and Professions Code.
The Plaintiff alleges the Defendants' engagement in a uniform
policy and systematic scheme of wage abuse against him and
similarly situated individuals in violation of applicable
California laws, including, without limitation, failing to provide
meal and rest breaks, failing to pay minimum and overtime wages,
failing to provide accurate wage statements, and failing to pay all
earned wages upon separation of employment.
Plaintiff Tux was employed by Defendants as a production line
employee from approximately May 2022 to March 1, 2023 at
Alum-A-Coat South El Monte location and was and is paid in whole or
in part on an hourly basis.
Priority Workforce, LLC is a staffing and recruiting company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Christopher Adams, Esq.
Vache A. Thomassian, Esq.
Caspar Jivalagian, Esq.
KJT LAW GROUP LLP
230 N. Maryland Ave. Suite 306
Glendale, CA 91206
Telephone: (818) 507-8525
E-mail: chris@kjtlawgroup.com
vache@kjtlawgroup.com
caspar@kjtlawgroup.com
PROGRESS SOFTWARE: Constantine Sues Over Unprotected Personal Info
------------------------------------------------------------------
DORRIE LYNN CONSTANTINE, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PROGRESS SOFTWARE CORPORATION,
PENSION BENEFIT INFORMATION, LLC d/b/a PBI RESEARCH SERVICES, and
MANHATTAN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants, Case No.
1:23-cv-12836-ADB (D. Mass., November 21, 2023) is a class action
against Defendants for their failure to properly secure and
safeguard personally identifiable information(PII) including, but
not limited to, Plaintiff and Class Members' names, Social Security
numbers, dates of birth, gender, zip codes, and policy numbers.
On August 30, 2023, PBI notified certain Manhattan Life customers
that they were affected by a data breach involving the MOVEit
software. Allegedly, PBI negligently chose to utilize PSC's MOVEit
software to store and transfer Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII
despite the fact that MOVEit contained security vulnerabilities.
Upon information and belief, Manhattan Life negligently chose to
utilize PBI to store and transfer Plaintiff's and Class Members'
PII despite the fact that PBI utilized PSC's MOVEit software which
contained security vulnerabilities, says the suit.
As a result of Defendants' unreasonable and inadequate data
security practices that resulted in the data breach, Plaintiff and
Class Members are at a current and ongoing substantial risk of
identity theft and have suffered numerous actual and concrete
injuries and damages, the suit alleges.
Accordingly, Plaintiff brings this action against Defendants
seeking redress for their unlawful conduct, and asserting claims
for: (i) negligence; (ii) breach of third-party beneficiary
contract; (iii) negligence per se; (iv) unjust enrichment; and (v)
declaratory judgment.
Progress Software Corporation is an American public company that
produces software for creating and deploying business
applications.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kristen A. Johnson, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
1 Faneuil Hall Square, 5th Floor
Boston, MA 02109
Telephone: (617) 482-3700
Facsimile: (617) 482-3003
E-mail: kristenj@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Steve W. Berman, Esq.
Sean R. Matt, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
1301 Second Avenue, Suite 2000
Seattle, WA 98101
Telephone: (206) 623-7292
Facsimile: (206) 623-0594
E-mail: steve@hbsslaw.com
sean@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Jeffrey S. Goldenberg, Esq.
GOLDENBERG SCHNEIDER, LPA
4445 Lake Forest Drive, Suite 490
Cincinnati, OH 45242
Telephone: (513) 345-8291
Facsimile: (513) 345-8294
E-mail: 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
E-mail: 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
E-mail: jlyon@thelyonfirm.com
PROVIDENCE HEALTH: Angulo Suit Seeks to Certify Three Classes
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CAROLINE ANGULO, a single
person, ERIC KELLER, a single person, and ISABEL LINDSEY and
CHARLES LINDSEY, a married couple, and CHRISTINE BASH, individually
and as a personal representative of the ESTATE OF STEVEN BASH, v.
PROVIDENCE HEALTH & SERVICES WASHINGTON, a non-profit Washington
Corporation, also d/b/a PROVIDENCE ST. MARY MEDICAL CENTER; Dr.
JASON A. DREYER, DO, and JANE DOE DREYER, husband and wife and the
marital community thereof; Dr. DANIEL ELSKENS DO, and JANE DOE
ELSKENS, husband and wife and the marital community thereof; and
JOHN/JANE DOES 1-10, and any marital communities thereof, Case No.
2:22-cv-00915-JLR (W.D. Wash.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to
enter an order certifying three classes.
This class action was filed after the revelation of widespread
false claims in a 2022 settlement between Defendant Providence
Heath & Services Washington also d/b/a St. Mary Medical Center and
the state and federal governments. Providence paid $22.7 million to
resolve False Claims Act allegations that Providence had
fraudulently billed state and federal health care programs for
medically unnecessary and/or overly complex neurosurgery procedures
of two neurosurgeons (Dr. Jason Dreyer and Dr. Daniel Elskens)
between 2013 and 2018.
Pursuant to Rule 23, Plaintiffs seek certification of the following
classes:
-- Settlement Class
"All patients whose treatments informed the basis of the
settlement between PROVIDENCE and DOJ (quantified for
settlement
purposes as $22,690,458, with $10,459,388 designated as
restitution for settlement purposes), who, by definition,
suffered special and/or general damages from medical procedures
that were medically unnecessary or otherwise improper for said
treatments;"
-- Non-Settlement Class/PROVIDENCE
"All patients who suffered damages as a result of medical
procedures at PROVIDENCE, performed by Dr. JASON A. DREYER, DO
and/or Dr. DANIEL ELSKENS DO that were medically unnecessary or
otherwise improper but whose treatments were not included in
the
settlement either because DOJ offered to settle for less than
full
restitution or because their treatment was paid for by private
health insurers such as Regence Blue Shield, or was paid
privately, for treatments during the relevant time periods;"
-- Non-Settlement Class/MULTICARE.
"All patients who suffered damages as a result of
medical procedures at MULTICARE performed by Dr. JASON A.
DREYER,
DO that were medically unnecessary or otherwise improper but
whose
treatments were not included in the restitution settlement
because
DOJ sought reimbursement for payments to PROVIDENCE only, for
treatments during the relevant time periods."
Dr. Dreyer began working as a spine surgeon at Providence in June
2013 while Dr. Elskens began at Providence/SMMC in November 2015,
after being recommended by Dr. Dreyer.
Providence is a for-profit Catholic health care system operating
multiple hospitals and medical clinics across seven states.
A copy of Plaintiffs' motion dated Nov. 22, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Rsfe1S at no extra charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
William A. Gilbert, Esq.
Beth M. Bollinger, Esq.
Ashley Richards, Esq.
GILBERT LAW FIRM, P.S.
421 W. Riverside Ave, Suite 353
Spokane, WA 99201
Telephone: (509)·321-0750
Facsimile: (509)·343-3315
E-mail: bill@wagilbert.com
- and -
Terrance G. Reed, Esq.
LANKFORD & REED, P.L.L.C.
120 N St Asaph St
Alexandria, VA 22314
Telephone: (703) 299-5000
PROVIDENCE PUBLIC: Class Settlement in Parents Suit Gets Final Nod
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Parents Leading for
Educational Equity (PLEE); et al., v. Providence Public School
Department; et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-00301-MSM-PAS (D.R.I.), the
Hon. Judge Mary S. McElroy entered an order granting the Parties
for final approval of a proposed settlement and class certification
for settlement purposes.
1. By order entered on September 11, 2023, the Court
provisionally
granted certification of class action status under Fed. R.
Civ.
P. 23(b)(2) for settlement purposes; granted preliminary
approval of the class settlement (Settlement Agreement); and
approved the proposed notice to class members and proposed
notice plan, with a fairness hearing scheduled for November
2,
2023 at 10 am.
2. On November 2, 2023, the Court conducted a Fairness Hearing
to
consider final approval of the Settlement Agreement.
3. Final certification of the Rule 23 Class. The Court finds
that
the Rule 23 subclasses, as defined in the Settlement
Agreement
meet the requirements of Rule 23(a) and Rule 23(b)(2) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
The Court finds that the subclasses are well defined and their
members are identifiable on objective standards, numbering over 100
identifiable members in each subclass.
The Court finds that the provisionally certified class
representatives have protected and will fairly and adequately
protect the interests of the class members and that each subclass
shares common questions of fact and law and that the claims of the
proposed class representatives are typical of the claims of their
respective class.
The Court further finds that class counsel satisfy the requirements
of Federal Rule 23(g).
Accordingly, the Court certifies the following two classes for
settlement purposes only and appoints attorneys Ellen Saideman,
Lynette Labinger and Jennifer Wood as class counsel
for both subclasses:
-- The Evaluation Subclass (Subclass 1): Identified children
denied
timely evaluation and determination of eligibility for special
education and related services: All children, who on
or after July 17, 2023, are or hereafter will be between the
ages
of three and five, with disabilities as defined by the IDEA,
living or will live in the City of Providence and who have been
identified by PPSD as requiring an initial evaluation for
eligibility for special education services and have not
received
or will not receive an initial evaluation and determination of
eligibility for special education and related services.
The following individuals are designated as class
representatives
of the Evaluation Subclass: A.A. and his parent Rachel Cohn,
and
J.I. and his parent Karen Imbert.
-- The Services Subclass (Subclass 2): Children with IEPs denied
IEP
Services: All children, who on or after July 17, 2023, are or
hereafter will be between the ages of three and five, with
disabilities, as defined by the IDEA, living or will live in
the
City of Providence, who have been determined eligible for
preschool programs under Part B of the IDEA and have been
provided
an IEP, but have been denied or delayed in the provision of
the
preschool programs and services identified in their IEPs on the
claimed basis of unavailable resources or staffing.
The following individuals are designated as class
representatives
of the Services Subclass: R.G. and his mother Dell Johnny, and
L.C. and his parent Lorena Rodriguez.
A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 27, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/4a8CYPC at no extra charge.[CC]
RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES: Class Cert Depositions Stayed in Borozny
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Borozny, et al., v.
Raytheon Technologies Corporation, Pratt & Whitney Division, et
al., Case No. 3:21-cv-01657 (D. Conn., Filed Dec. 14, 2021), the
Hon. Judge Sarala V. Nagala entered an order that depositions
during the briefing period for class certification are stayed.
-- Depositions can commence on April 1st. By March 15th, counsel
file a notice proposing a schedule to complete depositions and
the
close of discovery.
-- Within seven days, counsel shall inform the Court what should
remain sealed.
The nature of suit states Antitrust Litigation.
Raytheon is an American multinational aerospace and defense
conglomerate.[CC]
RCDC RESEARCH: Class Cert Discovery Extended to March 8, 2024
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as THOMAS SALAZAR,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
RCDC RESEARCH GROUP d/b/d DELTA TAX TEAM, Case No.
8:23-cv-00206-DOC-KES (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge David Carter
entered an order as follows:
1. The date by which the Plaintiff must complete class
certification and damage discovery is extended from Nov. 15,
2023, to March 8, 2024.
2. The date by which the Plaintiff must fileany motions for
class
certification and default judgment is extended from December
15,
2023, to March 29, 2024.
A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 22, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3t0onoU at no extra charge.[CC]
RCDC RESEARCH: Salazar Seeks More Time to Conduct Class Discovery
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as THOMAS SALAZAR,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
RCDC RESEARCH GROUP d/b/a DELTA TAX TEAM, Case No.
8:23-cv-00206-DOC-KES (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to
enter an order granting his request for an extension of time to:
1) conduct class certification and damages discovery by 90 days
from
November 15, 2023; and
2) file Plaintiff's motions for class certification and default
judgment by 120 days from December 15, 2023.
The Court had set a deadline of July 21, 2023, by when Plaintiff
must file any motions for class certification and default
judgment.
The Plaintiff has brought the instant class action with allegations
that Defendant violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
("TCPA").
The Plaintiff filed a class action complaint against Defendant on
February 2, 2023. The Plaintiff's complaint pleads two causes of
action under the TCPA. The first cause of action is for violation
of the TCPA's prohibition against making two or more solicitation
calls in a 12-month period to telephone numbers registered on the
National Do Not Call Registry for more than 30 days.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Nov. 21, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/480ov6I at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Niv V. Davidovich, Esq.
Elan N. Stone, Esq.
Isaac Guzman, Esq.
DAVIDOVICH STEIN LAW GROUP LLP
6442 Coldwater Canyon Avenue, Suite 209
North Hollywood, CA 91606
Telephone: (818) 661-2420
Facsimile: (818) 301-5131
E-mail: niv@davidovichlaw.com
elan@davidovichlaw.com
isaac@davidovichlaw.com
- and -
Eric H. Weitz, Esq.
Max S. Morgan, Esq.
THE WEITZ FIRM, LLC
1515 Market Street, Suite 1100
Philadelphia, PA 19102
Telephone: (267) 587-6240
Facsimile: (215) 689-0875
E-mail: eric.weitz@theweitzfirm.com
max.morgan@theweitzfirm.com
RECKITT BENCKISER: Vasseur Sues Over Mislabeled Essential Oils
--------------------------------------------------------------
Paige Vasseur, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Reckitt Benckiser LLC, Defendant, Case No.
2:23-cv-09899-HDV-AS (C.D. Cal., November 21, 2023) is a class
action seeking to challenge Defendant's false and deceptive
practices in the labeling and marketing of its Air Wick Essential
Oils Sandalwood, Air Wick Essential Mist Sandalwood, and Air Wick
Botanica Caribbean Sweetgrass & Sandalwood air freshener products
in violation of California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act,
California's False Advertising Law, and California's Unfair
Competition Law.
The Plaintiff and other consumers purchased the products and paid a
premium price based upon their reliance on the Defendant's front
label representations and advertising about sandalwood essential
oil. Had Plaintiff and other consumers been aware that the Products
do not contain sandalwood essential oil, they would not have
purchased the products or would have paid significantly less for
them. Accordingly, Plaintiff and Class members have been injured by
Defendant's deceptive business practices, says the suit.
Reckitt Benckiser LLC is a British multinational consumer goods
company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Benjamin Heikali, Esq.
Ruhandy Glezakos, Esq.
Joshua Nassir, Esq.
TREEHOUSE LAW, LLP
2121 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2580
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 751-5948
E-mail: bheikali@treehouselaw.com
rglezakos@treehouselaw.com
jnassir@treehouselaw.com
REDFIN CORP: Settles Agents' Wage Class Action for $3MM
-------------------------------------------------------
Dave Gallagher, writing for Real Estate News, reports that Redfin
has agreed to pay $3 million along with payroll taxes to settle a
case involving allegations of improper agent compensation.
The settlement, which received final approval on Nov. 28 and took
place in U.S. District Court in the Southern District of
California, will include 2,754 class members. The class
representatives were Jason Bell and Devin Cook.
The background: Bell worked for Redfin in 2019 both as an employee
agent and an associate agent, which involved two different pay
structures. Cook worked for Redfin as an associate agent from
2016-2019.
Both Bell and Cook accused Redfin of a number of labor violations,
including failure to pay overtime, failure to provide rest periods
and failure to reimburse business expenses.
In March, plaintiffs filed a consolidated class action complaint.
The members of the class action suit include associate agents who
worked at Redfin from April 30, 2017, through the end of 2022 as
well as employee agents who worked at the company between Nov. 20,
2016, and the end of 2022. Through mediation, the parties agreed on
a settlement.
What agents could get: According to court documents, participating
class members will receive an average gross payment of $658.13,
with an estimated highest gross payment of $5,035.25. Bell and Cook
will also receive $10,000 each as class representatives. [GN]
SAAB RESTAURANTS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages to Servers, Garcia Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
SANDRA GARCIA, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SAAB RESTAURANTS, INC. d/b/a LUMES PANCAKE
HOUSE, Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-16405 (N.D. Ill., November 30,
2023) arises from the Defendant's failure to comply with provisions
of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Illinois Minimum Wage Act, and
the the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act and seeks to
recover minimum and overtime wages for certain hours worked for
herself and all servers who worked within the past three years for
Lumes Pancake House in Chicago.
The Plaintiff worked for Defendant as a server from on or about
November 2021, through on or about April 2023. During her
employment, Plaintiff regularly worked in excess of 40 hours per
week. However, the Defendant failed to provide sufficient notice of
its intent to rely upon the federal and Illinois tip credits, and
otherwise enforced a policy of underpaying Servers the applicable
reduced wages during the relevant time period. The Defendant also
engaged in a pattern of regularly assigning tipped employees, who
were paid sub-minimum wages, to perform an array of duties outside
of their tipped occupations for a period of more than 30 continuous
minutes without compensating them the full minimum wage, says the
suit.
Saab Restaurants Inc., doing business as Lumes Pancake House in
Chicago, IL, provides food and beverage services to the general
public. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jordan Richards, Esq.
USA EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS - JORDAN RICHARDS, PLLC
1800 SE 10th Ave. Suite 205
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
E-mail: Jordan@jordanrichardspllc.com
Michael@usaemploymentlawyers.com
Sarah@usaemploymentlawyers.com
Trish@usaemploymentlawyers.com
SHULMAN ROGERS: Zambali Alleges Illegal Apartment Rent Collection
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BENJAMIN ZAMBALI, on his own behalf and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. SHULMAN ROGERS, P.A., COLUMBIA
531, LLC, and GREYSTAR MANAGEMENT SERVICES, L.P., Defendants, Case
No. 1:23-cv-03194-SAG (D. Md., Nov. 22, 2023) arises from the
Defendants' violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act,
the Maryland Declaratory Judgment Act, the Maryland's Consumer Debt
Collection Act, and the Maryland Consumer Protection Act.
According to the complaint, landlord Columbia 531 chose to
disregard Maryland law by seeking to collect unpaid rent for
unlicensed rental properties, through its debt collection law firm
and management company, Shulman Rogers, that aggressively pursued
payments for rent that Defendants were prohibited from seeking to
collect. As a result, tenants like Plaintiff were illegally coerced
into paying rent that Defendants were prohibited from collecting,
says the suit.
The Defendants' illegal collection efforts included falsely stating
a balance through the web payment portal at 10xlivingctc.com and
providing Notices of Intent to File a Complaint for Summary
Ejectment on no fewer than three occasions to Named Plaintiff, all
while unlicensed, the suit asserts.
Columbia 531 is a Delaware limited liability company with its
principal place of business in Howard County, Maryland. Defendant
Columbia 531 owns and manages numerous residential rental
properties throughout Maryland.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph Mack, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH S. MACK
PO Box 65066
Baltimore, MD 21209
Telephone: (443) 423-0464
E-mail: joseph@macklawonline.com
- and -
Ingmar Goldson, Esq.
THE GOLDSON LAW OFFICE
One Research Court, Suite 450
Rockville, MD 20850
Telephone: (240) 780-8829
E-mail: igoldson@goldsonlawoffice.com
SILICON VALLEY: Norwegian Fund to Co-Lead Securities Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Nerijus Adomaitis, writing for Reuters, reports that Norway's $1.5
trillion sovereign wealth fund, the world's largest, said on Dec. 1
it has been appointed by a U.S. court to co-lead an ongoing U.S.
securities class action relating to the now-bankrupt Silicon Valley
Bank (SVB).
SVB's collapse in March was the trigger for the worst banking shock
since the 2008 global financial crisis, sending bank stocks
globally on a wild ride.
The Norwegian fund said the SVB case raised significant concerns
regarding the integrity of the public markets, the governance of
large financial institutions and the interests of the investor
community more broadly.
"We manage money on behalf of all Norwegians. I see it as our duty
to take legal action to both maximise our recoveries after the SVB
collapse and to signal that this is not acceptable market
behaviour," the fund's Chief Executive Nicolai Tangen said in a
statement.
The fund, which invests Norway's surplus oil and gas revenue
abroad, is the world's biggest single stock market investor, owning
some 1.5% of all globally listed shares with stakes in more than
9,200 companies.
It held a 1% stake in SVB at the end of 2022, valued at $137.9
million, according to data on the fund's website.
The other co-lead plaintiff in the class action is Swedish pension
fund Sjunde AP-fonden (AP7), the Norwegian fund said. [GN]
SONOCO PRODUCTS: Faces Dorriety Suit Over Unpaid Overtime
---------------------------------------------------------
KEVIN DORRIETY, individually, and on behalf of himself and other
similarly situated current and former employees, Plaintiff v.
SONOCO PRODUCTS COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 4:23-cv-05986-RBH (D.
S.C., Nov. 21, 2023) is brought against the Defendant as a
collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act to recover
unpaid overtime compensation, and other damages owed to Plaintiff
and other similarly situated current and former hourly-paid
employees of Defendant.
Plaintiff Dorriety was employed by and performed work for Defendant
as an hourly-paid employee within this district during all times
material herein.
Sonoco Products Company is a global packaging company with more
than 250 processing and manufacturing facilities in the United
States, including those in the State of South Carolina.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Marybeth Mullaney, Esq.
652 Rutledge Ave, Suite A
Charleston, SC 29403
Telephone: (843) 588-5587
E-mail: marybeth@mullaneylaw.net
- and -
J. Russ Bryant, Esq.
JACKSON, SHIELDS, YEISER, HOLT OWEN & BRYANT
262 German Oak Drive
Memphis, TN 38018
Telephone: (901) 754-8001
Facsimile: (901) 754-8524
E-mail: gjackson@jsyc.com
rbryant@jsyc.com
jholt@jsyc.com
SPOKEO INC: Parties Seek to Extend Class Cert Briefing Schedule
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as AVIVA KELLMAN, JASON FRY,
NICHOLAS NEWELL, SUSAN GLEDHILL STEPHENS, BENNY GALLEGOS, and
SHELLY BOEDEKER, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated, v. SPOKEO, INC., Case No. 3:21-cv-08976-WHO (N.D. Cal.),
the Parties ask the Court to enter an order granting joint
stipulation to further extend class certification briefing
schedule:
1. Spokeo shall file its Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for
Class
Certification, and any expert declarations in support of the
Opposition, on or before January 26, 2024.
2. The Plaintiffs shall file their Reply in Support of the
Motion
for Class Certification on or before February 16, 2024.
3. The hearing date on Plaintiffs' Motion for Class
Certification
shall be extended to a date to be set by the Court.
Spokeo is a people search website that aggregates data from online
and offline sources.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Nov. 28, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RsT27E at no extra charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Michael F. Ram, Esq.
Marie N. Appel, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN
COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP
711 Van Ness Avenue, Suite
500 San Francisco, CA 94102
Telephone: (415) 358-6913
Facsimile: (415) 358-6293
E-mail: mram@forthepeople.com
mappel@forthepeople.com
- and -
Sam Strauss, Esq.
Raina Borrelli, Esq.
TURKE & STRAUSS LLP
613 Williamson St., Suite 201
Madison, WI 53703-3515
Telephone: (608) 237-1775
Facsimile: (509) 4423
E-mail: sam@turkestrauss.com
raina@turkestrauss.com
The Defendant is represented by:
John Nadolenco, Esq.
Daniel D. Queen, Esq.
Jennifer M. Chang, Esq.
Max w. Hirsch, Esq.
MAYER BROWN LLP
333 South Grand Avenue, 47th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 229-9500
Facsimile: (213) 625-0248
E-mail: jnadolenco@mayerbrown.com
dqueen@mayerbrown.com
jchang@mayerbrown.com
mhirsch@mayerbrown.com
TENASKA MARKETING: Faces Deutscher Suit Over Illegal Profiteering
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Eli Deutscher, Daryl Gregg, Luke Oborny, Neal Ward, and Steven
Mongeau, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. Tenaska Marketing Ventures and Macquarie
Energy LLC, Defendants, Case No. 6:23-cv-01249 (D. Kan., November
21, 2023) is a class action against the Defendants for alleged
violation of the Kansas Consumer Protection Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendants profiteered from Winter
Storm Uri in February 2021 within the meaning of the KCPA because
they unjustifiably and substantially: a) increased the price they
charged for natural gas by more than 25% than the price at which
natural gas was available before the disaster; b) charged prices
for natural gas during the disaster that was 25% more than the
price at which natural gas was readily obtainable by other
consumers; and c) charged unjustifiably high prices for natural gas
that were not attributable to any additional costs that Defendants
incurred in connection with the sale of the product or service.
As a result of Defendants' illegal profiteering, Plaintiffs have
suffered damages. Specifically, the damages claimed are those
amounts the Court determines that Defendants profiteered, together
with the financing costs assessed as a result of those
unconscionable charges, with total damages estimated to be in
excess of $9 million, and with specific amounts to be assessed to
the individual Defendants based on the charges made by each
Defendant to Midwest Energy, which Midwest Energy passed through to
its residential consumers.
Tenaska Marketing Ventures is a private, independent energy company
based in the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jay F. Fowler, Esq.
Samuel J. Walenz, Esq.
FOULSTON SIEFKIN, LLP
1551 N. Waterfront Parkway, Suite 100
Wichita, KS 67206-4466
Telephone: (316) 291-9541
Facsimile: (316) 267-6345
E-mail: jfowler@foulston.com
swalenz@foulston.com
- and -
Scott C. Nehrbass, Esq.
Lee M. Smithyman, Esq.
James P. Zakoura, Esq.
FOULSTON SIEFKIN, LLP
7500 College Blvd., Suite 1400
Overland Park, KS 66210
Telephone: (913) 484-4627
Facsimile: (913) 498-2101
E-mail: snehrbass@foulston.com
lsmithyman@foulston.com
jzakoura@foulston.com
TERRAFORM LABS: May Face Fraud Class Action in Singapore
--------------------------------------------------------
Jamie Crawley, Amitoj Singh, writing for CoinDesk, report that
Terraform Labs and its founder, Do Kwon, may be hit with a
class-action lawsuit in Singapore after the High Court dismissed an
attempt to have it thrown out, Business Times reported on Nov. 30.
Terraform lawyers tried to shift the action to an arbitration
process, citing the website's terms of use, according to the
Business Times. The lawyers claimed users had foregone the right to
trial and to join a class-action suit. The court ruled otherwise.
"To our knowledge, this is the furthest a class-action suit has
progressed in the world," Mahesh Rai, a director of Drew & Napier,
which represents the claimants, said in an interview. "Now we are
approaching discovery stage."
The suit was filed in September 2022 by Julian Moreno Beltran and
Douglas Gan on behalf of 375 others, who claim they lost a combined
$57 million.
The claimants are alleging fraudulent misrepresentation by
Terraform Labs, Do Kwon and his co-founders in their promotion of
the algorithmic stablecoin terraUSD (UST), which led them to
purchase and stake the tokens and hold on to them as UST lost its
peg to the U.S. dollar in May 2022 and plunged to less than $0.10.
Terraform also faces charges of fraud in the U.S. brought by the
Securities and Exchange Commission, which alleges it was selling
unregistered securities. In October, Terraform asked for this case
to be dismissed on the grounds that the regulator had been unable
to make its case.
The company did not immediately respond to CoinDesk's request for
further comment. [GN]
THIRD COAST: Sharkco Seafood Sues Over Crude Oil Spill in La.
-------------------------------------------------------------
SHARKCO SEAFOOD INTERNATIONAL, LLC; KEB, L.L.C.; BRUCE DRURY; AND
KEVIN DRURY; individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. THIRD COAST INFRASTRUCTURE, LLC and MAIN
PASS OIL GATHERING COMPANY, LLC, Defendants, Case No.
2:23-cv-07036-WBV-DPC (E.D. La., Nov. 22, 2023) is a class action
against the Defendants for negligence, strict liability, and for
violation of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990.
On November 16, 2023, a major release of crude oil in the Gulf of
Mexico commenced from the Main Pass Oil Gathering Company pipeline
system off the coast of Plaquemines Parish, releasing from MPOG's
pipeline system in the vicinity of the Main Pass of the Mississippi
River delta and extending along the coastal waters toward Southwest
Pass, imperiling shipping interests, fishing and shrimping
interests, and the unique and valuable property and ecosystems of
the Plaquemines Parish coastal wetlands and barrier islands. In
short, the release of oil from MPOG's pipeline endangers the
property, living, and way of life of the Plaintiffs and all those
similarly situated throughout Plaquemines Parish and nearby
Louisiana coastal waters and wetlands, the suit contends.
The Plaintiffs seek to represent a class of commercial fishermen
and commercial fishing-related businesses who derive their business
from the waters affected by the oil that has spilled and may be
continuing to spill from the MPOG pipeline system.
Third Coast Infrastructure, LLC is a midstream company focused on
offshore operations to provide oil and gas midstream services to
customers.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Charles J. Ballay, Esq.
BALLAY, BRAUD & COLON, PLC
8114 Highway 23
Belle Chasse, LA 70037
Telephone: (504) 394-9841
Facsimile: (504) 394-9945
E-mail: Charles@NolaAttorneys.com
- and -
A.M. "Tony" Clayton, Esq.
D'Ann "Dee" Penner, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF A.M. "TONY" CLAYTON
3741 La. Highway 1 South
Port Allen, LA 70767
Telephone: (337) 564-2217
Facsimile: (225) 383-7631
E-mail: dpenner@claytonfrugelaw.com
- and -
Gladstone N. Jones, III, Esq.
Bernard E. Boudreaux, Jr., Esq.
Kevin E. Huddell, Esq.
Michael P. Arata, Esq.
John T. Arnold, Esq.
Alayne Gobeille, Esq.
Thomas F. Dixon, Esq.
Rosa E. Acheson, Esq.
JONES SWANSON HUDDELL LLC
601 Poydras Street, Suite 2655
New Orleans, LA 70130
Telephone: (504) 523-2500
Facsimile: (504) 523-2508
- and -
James R. Swanson, Esq.
H.S. Bartlett III, Esq.
Lance C. McCardle, Esq.
E. Blair Schilling, Esq.
FISHMAN HAYGOOD, L.L.P.
201 St. Charles Avenue, Suite 4600
New Orleans, LA 70170-4600
Telephone: (504) 586-5252
Facsimile: (504) 586-5250
TOUFAYAN BAKERIES: Saitman Sues Over Mislabeled Bread Products
--------------------------------------------------------------
CONNER SAITMAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. TOUFAYAN BAKERIES, INC., Defendant, Case No.
5:23-cv-02439 (C.D. Cal., Nov. 30, 2023) seeks to redress the
false, misleading, and deceptive advertising and packaging claims
that Toufayan makes in connection with the sale of its wheat based
bread products none of which contain even a fraction of the protein
they prominently advertise to unsuspecting consumers on the front
of their packaging.
According to the complaint, in seeking to exploit the market trend
and to offer consumers more than just empty carbohydrates, Toufayan
markets its Smart Pockets and Keto bread products as containing
significant amounts of protein when, in fact, the products offer
consumers only a fraction of the protein advertised in digestible
form.
Despite prominently advertising on the front label of its Smart
Pocket products ("Original," "Carb - Whole Oats and Flax,"
"Everything," and "100 percent Whole Wheat") and Keto products
("Wraps," "Flat Bread," and "Pita") (collectively, the "Class
Products") that they contain a specific amount of protein, the
nutritional panel on the back of the packaging for each product
glaringly fails to disclose the daily value of protein that
consumption of the product will actually provide.
Had the Plaintiff and members of the class been provided with the
corrected amount of protein per serving, they would not have
purchased the products or, alternatively, would not have paid the
premium charged, says the suit.
TOUFAYAN BAKERY INC. provides bakery products. The Company's line
of business includes the manufacturing of fresh or frozen bread and
bread-type rolls, cakes, pies, and other perishable bakery
products. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James R. Denlea, Esq.
Jeffrey I. Carton, Esq.
Stan Sharovskiy, Esq.
DENLEA & CARTON LLP
2 Westchester Park Drive, Suite 410
White Plains, NY 10604
Telephone: (914) 331-0100
Facsimile: (914) 331-0105
Email: jdenlea@denleacarton.com
jcarton@denleacarton.com
ssharovskiy@denleacarton.com
- and -
Michael D. Braun, Esq.
KUZYK LAW, LLP
2121 Avenue of the Stars, Ste. 800
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (213) 401-4100
Facsimile: (213) 401-0311
Email: mdb@kuzykclassactions.com
UNITED PARCEL: Wynn Labor Suit Removed to N.D. Cal.
---------------------------------------------------
The case styled as BRITTANY WYNN, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE,
INC., an Ohio corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,
Defendants, Case No. 5:23-cv-06044, was removed from the Superior
Court of the State of California for the County of Santa Clara to
the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California on November 21, 2023.
The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of California assigned
Case No. 5:23-cv-06044 to the proceeding.
In the complaint, the Plaintiff alleges seven purported causes of
action for: (i) failure to provide meal periods under the
California Labor Code; (ii) failure to provide rest periods under
the California Labor Code; (iii) failure to pay hourly and overtime
wages under the California Labor Code; (iv) failure to provide sick
pay under the California Labor Code; (v) failure to indemnify under
the California Labor Code; (vi) failure to timely pay all final
wages under the California Labor Code; and (vii) unfair competition
under the California Business & Professions Code.
United Parcel Service, Inc. is an American multinational shipping
and receiving and supply chain management company.[BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Elizabeth A. Brown, Esq.
Rachel E. Davey, Esq.
GBG LLP
601 Montgomery Street, Suite 840
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 603-5000
Facsimile: (415) 840-7210
E-mail: lisabrown@gbgllp.com
racheldavey@gbgllp.com
UNITED SERVICES: Policyholders Sue Over Medical Claims Denial
-------------------------------------------------------------
Sanford Nowlin, writing for San Antonio Current, reports that a
class action lawsuit filed in Washington Superior Court accuses San
Antonio-based insurance giant USAA of skirting its responsibility
to pay policyholders' medical bills by using an outside vendor's
computer system designed to cut its payouts for healthcare claims.
The plaintiffs -- both USAA policyholders living in Washington
state -- maintain USAA Casualty Insurance Co. and USAA General
Indemnity Co. denied their payments for medical treatment after
they suffered injuries in separate car crashes.
USAA officials had no immediate comment on the suit, which was
filed on Nov. 16.
Officials with law firms Tousley Brain Stevens and Franklin D. Azar
& Associates, which represent the plaintiffs also were
unavailable.
The suit alleges USAA regularly denies medical claims to
policyholders because it outsources its adjustment work to an
automated system operated by outside company Auto Injury Solutions.
The insurer's outsourcing allows it to "systematically, wrongfully,
and arbitrarily" deny or cut the amount of claims, according to the
petition.
The suit also argues USAA is legally obligated to conduct its own
investigation of medical claims before issuing denials. It alleges
USAA underwrote thousands of automobile insurance policies in
Washington for which it was required under law to offer "payment of
'all reasonable and necessary' medical expenses incurred by a
covered person."
In addition to punitive damages, the plaintiffs are asking for
financial compensation for medical bills that USAA declined to
cover. They also want the court to bar the insurer from continuing
to handle its claims using Auto Injury Solutions' computer system.
[GN]
UNIVERSITY OF OREGON: Female Student-Athletes Sue Over Sex Bias
---------------------------------------------------------------
Thirty-two female student-athletes filed a detailed sex
discrimination class action over 100 pages long against the
University of Oregon on Dec. 1 for depriving women of equal
treatment and benefits, equal athletic aid, and equal opportunities
to participate in varsity intercollegiate athletics in violation of
Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972. The case, filed by
twenty-six women's varsity beach volleyball team members and six
women's club rowing team members in the U.S. District Court in
Eugene, Oregon, seeks "to hold Oregon accountable for
discriminating against all of its female student-athletes and
potential student-athletes, make Oregon pay damages to the women it
has deprived and is depriving of equal treatment and equal athletic
financial aid, and stop Oregon from violating Title IX in the
future."
Title IX, a federal civil rights law, prohibits sex discrimination
by the University of Oregon and all educational institutions that
receive federal funds. As alleged in the complaint, the women's
beach volleyball team members "aim to hold Oregon accountable for
depriving them and all varsity female student-athletes of equal
treatment and equal athletic financial aid in violation of Title
IX." The women's club rowing team members "seek to hold Oregon
accountable for depriving them and all present and future female
students at Oregon of equal opportunities to participate in varsity
athletics."
"Title IX has been the law for more than fifty years. Oregon needs
to comply with it, now," said Arthur H. Bryant of Bailey & Glasser,
LLP in Oakland, CA, lead counsel for the women. "Three months ago,
The Oregonian wrote about the school's potential discrimination
issues in a front-page investigative report: "Oregon Ducks beach
volleyball players detail disparate treatment that experts say
could violate Title IX." But the school refuses to change its ways
or even admit there is a problem. It has taught its women athletes
what the history of Title IX has shown: If women want equality,
they need to fight for it. So that's what the women at Oregon are
doing."
Lead Plaintiff Ashley Schroeder, captain of the women's varsity
beach volleyball team, said, "Based on the way the beach volleyball
team has been treated, female athletes at Oregon do not need much
food or water, good or clean clothes or uniforms, scholarships,
medical treatment or mental health services, their own facilities,
a locker room, proper transportation, or other basic necessities.
Male athletes are treated incredibly better in almost every
respect. We could not practice because, sadly and disturbingly,
someone died near the public courts we have to use in Amazon Park.
We cannot use the restrooms there because they're not safe and,
sometimes, people are in the stalls using drugs. But the men's
teams have full scholarships, multi-million-dollar budgets, and
professional-level, state-of-the-art facilities. I love the
University of Oregon, but this hurtful, outrageous sex
discrimination has to stop."
The lawsuit cites Oregon's own data to show the school is depriving
women of equal treatment and athletic aid. According to its Equity
in Athletics Disclosure Act numbers, verified by Oregon as accurate
to the federal government, women are 49% of the student-athletes,
but Oregon spends only 25% of its athletics dollars and 15% of its
recruiting dollars on them. To make up for the unequal athletic aid
it paid its male student-athletes from 2017-18 to 2021-22, the past
five years for which data is publicly available, Oregon would have
to pay over $4.5 million in damages to its female student-athletes.
And the unequal expenditures continue.
Plaintiff Elise Haverland, the women's club rowing team captain,
said, "We love this school, but, in addition to treating its women
athletes unfairly, it is also depriving us and other women of equal
opportunities to participate. Oregon's own numbers show it needs to
add at least 94 varsity women athletes to reach proportionality.
That includes a women's rowing team and more."
"We are proud to represent these courageous women who have decided
to stand up and fight for the equality Title IX requires and
against the sex discrimination that Title IX prohibits," said
co-counsel Lori Bullock of Bailey & Glasser LLP in Des Moines,
Iowa. "These young women did not go to school imagining they would
sue their university, but they are committed to fighting for what
is right."
The other Plaintiffs in the case are women's varsity beach
volleyball players Zoe Almanza, Jade Bernal, Kendall Clark, Josie
Cole, Vivian Donovan, Halli Fields, Siulolovao Folau, Natasha
George, Josie Griffiths, Alexandra Haden, Delaney Hopen, Madelyn
Lafollette, Alex Laita, Anastasia Lima, Mia Lopez, Dahlia
McAllister, Presley McCaskill, Abigail Plevin, Valerie Peterson,
Batia Rotshtein, Savannah Siegrist, Alaina Thomas, Ella Tyus, Carly
Wallace, and Beatrice Wetton and women's club rowing team members
Claire Daley, Anna Maria Knight, River Ribeiro, Sophia Schmitz, and
Sydney Weddle.
Local counsel Jennifer Middleton of Johnson Johnson Lucas &
Middleton in Eugene, OR, said, "The students have filed this
lawsuit to ensure the university follows the law and treats women
athletes fairly. It's time for the University of Oregon to live up
to its principles."
Joshua Hammack, Cary Joshi, Laura E. Babiak, and Savanna Jones of
Bailey & Glasser, LLP in Washington, D.C., and Charleston, WV, also
represent the women.
Arthur H. Bryant, partner at Bailey & Glasser, LLP, is the former
Chairman and Executive Director of Public Justice, a national
public interest law firm headquartered in Washington, D.C., where
he used cutting-edge litigation to fight for consumers' rights,
civil rights, workers' rights, a healthy environment, the poor and
the powerless, and access to justice for all. Arthur was the lead
trial counsel in the first Title IX case against a university for
discriminating against its women athletes and potential athletes.
He and Bailey Glasser's Title IX team, which he leads, have
successfully represented more female (and male) student-athletes
and potential student-athletes in Title IX litigation against
schools and universities than any lawyers in the country. Since he
joined Bailey Glasser in 2020, they have won groundbreaking Title
IX settlements with Brown University, the College of William &
Mary, the University of North Carolina at Pembroke, East Carolina
University, Dartmouth College, Clemson University, the University
of St. Thomas, La Salle University, Dickinson College, and Florida
State University. The Oregon Trial Lawyers Association's public
service award is named the Arthur H. Bryant Public Justice Award.
Bailey & Glasser, LLP is an award-winning national law firm with
offices across the county, handling high-stakes litigation and
corporate deals on behalf of its clients, representing businesses
in many industries and of all sizes (from Fortune 500 companies to
family offices), individuals, governmental entities, and government
servants. Collaborative and innovative, it handles litigation for -
and against - companies of all sizes, including multi-national
conglomerates, insurance carriers, energy companies, finance
companies, technology behemoths, and more. Its lawyers are
frequently hired by other law firms to lead bet-the-company
litigation, particularly when matters are unable to settle, and
clients become aware that skilled trial lawyers in the courtroom
are an essential investment. See www.Baileyglasser.com.
Johnson Johnson Lucas & Middleton is a Eugene, Oregon, law firm
fighting for justice, equality, and accountability. For over 40
years, JJLM has represented people harmed by others' wrongdoing,
including civil rights violations and discrimination. See
https://www.justicelawyers.com
For more information, contact:
Arthur Bryant, Bailey & Glasser, LLP, (510) 507-9972,
abryant@baileyglasser.com
Lori Bullock, Bailey & Glasser, LLP, (515) 231-6008,
lbullock@baileyglasser.com [GN]
VALLEY HEALTH: Appeals Remand Ruling in Doe Privacy Rights Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Valley Health Systems Inc. filed an appeal from the District
Court's Opinion and Order dated October 24, 2023 entered in the
lawsuit styled Jane Doe, individually and on behalf of all other
Citizens of the state of New Jersey similarly situated v. VALLEY
HEALTH SYSTEM, INC. d/b/a THE VALLEY HOSPITAL, INC., VALLEY HOME
CARE, INC., VALLEY MEDICAL GROUP, Case No. 2-23-cv-00185, in the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey.
As reported in the Class Action Reporter, the suit was removed from
the Superior Court of New Jersey, Bergen County, to the United
States District Court for the District of New Jersey on January 13,
2023.
The Plaintiff's complaint purports to challenge Valley Health's
routine on-line practices as various invasions of privacy,
including an alleged violation of New Jersey's wiretapping act,
among other claims.
On March 24, 2023, the Plaintiff filed a motion to remand the case
to the Superior Court of New Jersey which the Court granted on
October 24 through an Order signed by Judge Evelyn Padin.
The appellate case is captioned as Valley Health Systems Inc. v.
Jane Doe, Case No. 23-3049, in the United States Court of Appeals
for the Third Circuit, filed on November 22, 2023.[BN]
Defendant-Appellant VALLEY HEALTH SYSTEMS INC, DBA Valley Hospital,
DBA Valley Home Care Inc, DBA Valley Medical Group, is represented
by:
Mariel Belanger, Esq.
Liza M. Walsh, Esq.
WALSH PIZZI O'REILLY & FALANGA
Three Gateway Center
100 Mulberry Street, 15th Floor
Newark, NJ 07102
Telephone: (973) 757-1039
- and -
Eric R. Fish, Esq.
BAKER & HOSTETLER
45 Rockefeller Plaza, 10th Floor
New York, NY 10111
- and -
Paul G. Karlsgodt, Esq.
BAKER & HOSTETLER
1801 California Street, Suite 4400
Denver, CO 80202
Telephone: (303) 861-0600
- and -
Elizabeth A. Scully, Esq.
BAKER & HOSTETLER
1050 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20036
Telephone: (202) 861-1500
Plaintiff-Appellee JANE DOE is represented by:
Kevin Laukaitis, Esq.
LAUKAITIS LAW
954 Avenida Ponce De Len
Suite 205, #10518
San Juan, PR 00907
Telephone: (215) 789-4462
- and -
Jason J. Rozger, Esq.
MENKEN SIMPSON & ROZGER
80 Pine Street, 33rd Floor
New York, NY 10005
Telephone: (212) 509-1616
VITAL PHARMACEUTICALS: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Garcia Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
JOHN GARCIA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. VITAL PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. d/b/a BANG
ENERGY, Defendants, Case No. CACE-23-021552 (Fla. Cir., Broward
Cty., Nov. 23, 2023) seeks to stop the Defendants' practice of
making unsolicited calls.
VITAL PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., doing business as VPX Sports, provides
sports and energy beverages. The Company offers fat loss and
energy, muscle building, pre and post workout recovery, health,
nutritional supplement stacks, and other products. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua A. Glickman, Esq.
Shawn A. Heller, Esq.
SOCIAL JUSTICE LAW COLLECTIVE, PL
974 Howard Ave.
Dunedin, FL 34698
Tel: (202) 709-5744
Fax: (866) 893-0416
Email: josh@sjlawcollective.com
shawn@sjlawcollective.com
WELLS FARGO: Employee Files Class Action Over Unpaid Overtime Pay
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Gelsi, writing for MarketWatch, reports that a Wells Fargo &
Co. employee taking part in a rare unionization effort at the bank
filed a class-action lawsuit in federal court on Nov. 30 in an
effort to earn overtime pay in her work as a senior premier
banker.
Sabrina Perez's complaint with the law firm Outten & Golden, filed
in federal court in the Northern District of California, challenges
an alleged practice at Wells Fargo WFC, +1.54% of exempting senior
premier bankers from overtime pay, which is 1.5 times regular pay
when a worker puts in more than 40 hours in a week.
The lawsuit accuses San Francisco-based Wells Fargo of violating
the U.S. Fair Labor Standards Act, as well as New Mexico state wage
laws.
"Wells Fargo systematically understaffs its branch locations," the
lawsuit said. "Senior premier bankers spend significant time
performing these tasks, which forces them to work long hours. . . .
But because Wells Fargo does not pay senior bankers overtime, it
evades the responsibility to pay for the overtime work it
assigns."
A Wells Fargo spokesperson declined to comment.
Perez, a senior premier banker in the Albuquerque, N.M., branch,
said she had worked 43 hours during the week of July 10 alone
without overtime compensation, according to the suit. The lawsuit
estimates at least 40 people in New Mexico could be affected by the
practices, plus many more across the country.
There are "hundreds of current and former senior premier bankers
who are [in a similar situation to the] plaintiff and were denied
overtime compensation," the complaint said.
Perez has also joined a group of employees at the Wells Fargo
branch in Albuquerque, N.M., to file plans with the National Labor
Relations Board to form a collective-bargaining unit, as the Wall
Street Journal reported earlier this month.
From the archives (September 2023): Bank of America's $23-an-hour
minimum pay is now the highest among big banks. But workers want
more -- and so do union organizers.
The lawsuit over overtime pay does not mention the unionization
effort. [GN]
WEST COAST: Lopez Wage-and-Hour Suit Removed to E.D. Cal.
---------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as JESSIE LOPEZ, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated, and the general public, Plaintiff v.
WEST COAST ARBORISTS, INC., a California corporation; and DOES 1
through 50, inclusive Defendants, Case No. 23CV008384, was removed
from the Superior Court of the State of California, for the County
of Sacramento to the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of California on November 21, 2023.
The Clerk of Court for the Eastern District of California assigned
Case No. 2:23-at-01200 to the proceeding.
In the complaint, Plaintiff alleges, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated, seven total causes of action, six of
which are for various violations of the California Labor Code and
one for "Unfair Competition" under the California Business &
Professions Code.
West Coast Arborists, Inc. is a family-owned company providing
professional tree maintenance and management services.[BN]
Defendant West Coast Arborists is represented by:
Thomas W. Kovacich, Esq.
Ronald W. Novotny, Esq.
ATKINSON, ANDELSON, LOYA, RUUD & ROMO
A Professional Law Corporation
12800 Center Court Drive South, Suite 300
Cerritos, CA 90703-9364
Telephone: (562) 653-3200
Facsimile: (562) 653-3333
WORLD RUGBY: Players to Apply for Brain Injury Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------
Sean Ingle, writing for The Guardian, reports that it is almost
three years to the day since the England 2003 Rugby World Cup
winner Steve Thompson sent shock waves through the sport by
revealing that he had been diagnosed with early onset dementia, and
opened the door for hundreds of other players with similar
stories.
At the high court in London on Dec. 1, up to 295 players --
including Thompson -- will apply for a class action lawsuit as they
attempt to take a major step forward in their legal battle with
rugby union's governing bodies. The players, who are seeking
damages from World Rugby, the Rugby Football Union (RFU) and the
Welsh Rugby Union (WRU) for negligence and failing to protect them,
are applying for their cases to be heard together as a group
litigation order (GLO). That, in essence, would mean their
compensation claims become one group action case, rather than
hundreds of individual claims, in any future hearings. The case
file is understood to refer to 268 players, with another 27 issuing
proceedings and who would be included under a GLO.
However, several hurdles lie ahead. It may take until February or
March for the GLO to be granted, and a full hearing may not take
place before the end of 2024. Crucially, the players will then have
to prove on the balance of probabilities that the game's
authorities are directly to blame for their conditions.
The players' solicitor, Richard Boardman, has insisted that the
governing bodies were negligent, as they failed to take reasonable
action to protect players from permanent brain injuries caused by
repetitive concussive and sub-concussive blows.
"This is about a systemic failure by the governing bodies, those at
the top of the pyramid who create and enforce the rules and
regulations," he said. "It is not limited to a one-off breach, but
instead it is about the whole ecosystem that the sport's governing
bodies have put in place."
The high court is expected to hear two other applications from the
players' legal team. The first concerns whether some claimants can
remain anonymous in future hearings, while the second regards
whether their legal team can use 45 cases in a future hearing as a
proxy for all 295 players.
That last point is expected to prove particularly contentious given
that in GLO cases both sides have to agree. Boardman said that the
45 cases contained a full range of different diagnoses, as well as
male and female players, international and amateurs, and cases from
before 2011 and after.
However, in a statement, World Rugby, the RFU and the WRU made it
clear the two legal teams were still at loggerheads.
"We remain saddened to hear the stories of former players who are
struggling," they said. "Despite court orders to do so, the
players' lawyers have yet to provide full details of the claims
being made against us.
"Therefore we cannot comment on the ongoing legal action, nor reach
out to the players directly. We would want players involved to know
that we listen, we care and continue to champion player welfare as
the sport's No 1 priority."
The players involved in the action were offered support by the
former England international Courtney Lawes. "I do feel for those
guys, especially because you just didn't know at the time what sort
of repercussions there would be from playing rugby," he said. "It's
not like they signed up for it, because they had no idea. I suppose
none of us do really, but if you've got some awareness you might
think twice."
But the 34-year-old, who retired from the international game after
the Rugby World Cup, also said: "There's never going to be no
concussions. We play a physical contact sport, a rough game. As
long as people understand that there are risks in playing this
game, they can make a decision whether they want to do it." [GN]
WORLDPAC INC: Anaya Wage-and-Hour Suit Removed to C.D. Cal.
-----------------------------------------------------------
CARLOS ANAYA, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. WORLDPAC, INC.; ADVANCED AUTO PARTS; and
DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No.
30-2023-01332713-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
November 21, 2023.
The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 8:23-cv-02184 to the proceeding.
The complaint alleges eight causes of action: (1) failure to pay
all hours worked at minimum wage; (2) failure to pay overtime wages
for daily overtime worked; (3) failure to authorize or permit meal
periods; (4) failure to authorize or permit rest period; (5)
failure to pay wages for accrued paid sick days; (6) failure to
provide complete and accurate wage statements; (7) failure to pay
all earned wages and final paychecks due at time of separation of
employment; and (8) unfair competition.
Worldpac, Inc. distributes motor vehicle equipment and aftermarket
replacement automotive parts.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Adam Y. Siegel, Esq.
JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
725 South Figueroa Street, Suite 2500
Los Angeles, CA 90017-5408
Telephone: (213) 689-0404
Facsimile: (213) 689-0430
E-mail: Adam.Siegel@jacksonlewis.com
- and -
Robert Yang, Esq.
JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
50 California Street, 9th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-4615
Telephone: (415) 394-9400
Facsimile: (415) 394-9401
E-mail: Rob.Yang@jacksonlewis.com
[*] TCPA Class Action Filings Up 43% in October 2023
----------------------------------------------------
Eric J. Troutman of Troutman Amin, LLP, of TCPAWorld, in an article
for The National Law Review, disclosed that "We have been tracking
the impressive increase in TCPA cases year over year but October
was really one for the record books."
"TCPA class action filings spiked 43% above October,
2022–continuing an overall trend of MUCH more TCPA class action
activity in 2023 over 2022.
"And if that wasn't eye popping enough for you -- 69% of all TCPA
cases were filed as class actions. That's 7 out of every 10 cases.
"I have never seen anything like this– no one has. A federal
statute that is generating many times more class actions than
individual suits? Such a thing has never existed before.
"Indeed, other statutes generate single digit class litigation.
"And once the FCC's new ruling takes effect we can foresee a
further spike in TCPA class litigation.
"The TCPA really is a once in a generation opportunity for
plaintiff's lawyers to get rich, and man are they taking it." [GN]
*********
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 ***