/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/111012.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Wednesday, October 12, 2011, Vol. 13, No. 202 Headlines ADA COUNTY MISDEMEANOR: Sued Over Excessive Probationer Fees CENTRO: PwC Asks Judge to Withdraw From Class Action DELPHI AUTOMOTIVE: Sued Over Alleged Price-Fixing Conspiracy EXXON MOBIL: Faces Class Action Over Yellowstone River Oil Spill HONDA: Hagens Berman Files Class Action Over Price-Fixing Scheme HONORE-MERCIER: C. Difficile Victims to Split C$1MM Settlement INCO LTD: Ontario Court Dismisses Environmental Class Action KEYBASE FINANCIAL: Class Certification Hearing Set for June LCD PANEL MANUFACTURERS: Retailers Can Continue Antitrust Claims PHILIPS ELECTRONICS: Class Action Settlement Gets Initial Okay POWERCOR: Black Saturday Bushfire Class Action Nears Settlement QUICKEN LOANS: Accused of Secretly Recording Phone Calls REEBOK: Settles Class Action Over Toning Shoes & Apparel SINOTECH ENERGY: Class Action Lead Plaintiff Deadline Nears SONY: Sued for Billing Unauthorized Music "Subscriptions" STATE OF MICHIGAN: Sued Over Poor Performance of Contract CNAs SYNGENTA CROP: Petitions for Review in Atrazine Suit Denied TRAVELZOO INC: Class Action Lead Plaintiff Deadline Nears ZIONS BANK: Faces Class Action Over Debit Card Overdraft Fees ********* ADA COUNTY MISDEMEANOR: Sued Over Excessive Probationer Fees ------------------------------------------------------------ Cynthia Sewell, writing for IdahoStatesman.com, reports that Ada County contracts with a private for-profit company to provide services to people sentenced to misdemeanor probation. A company that's owned by Nancy Cladis, Ada County Misdemeanor Probation Services Inc., holds that contract. On Oct. 6, three current probationers filed a class-action complaint in 4th District Court alleging Ms. Cladis' company has been charging misdemeanor probationer fees in excess of what is allowed under state law. They want the practices to stop, their fees reimbursed and an unspecified amount of compensation. Plaintiffs Kenneth Green, Nicholas Hall and Nathaniel Smith said they were not ordered by the court to undergo drug or alcohol testing as a condition of their probation, yet each of their probation officers ordered them to submit to testing, which cost them fees in excess of the $50 maximum monthly supervision fee allowed under state law. On July 1, 2011, the maximum fee increased to $75. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Boise Guardian's Dave Frazier, there could be "thousands" of additional plaintiffs among current or former Ada County probationers. Neither Philip Gordon, the three men's attorney, nor Ms. Cladis could be reached for comment on Oct. 7. Commissioner Sharon Ullman said on Oct. 7 she has met with several current and former employees of Ms. Cladis' company and has "grave concerns" about the company's treatment of employees and clients. On Oct. 4, the commissioners already have scheduled a routine consideration of the county's two-year contract with Cladis. At that meeting, Ms. Ullman wants the commissioners to initiate an investigation that, if wrongdoing is found, could allow the county to break the contract. "I personally believe there is cause to do an investigation," Ms. Ullman said. CENTRO: PwC Asks Judge to Withdraw From Class Action ---------------------------------------------------- Leonie Wood, writing for The Sydney Morning Herald, reports that the audit firm at the center of the 2007 Centro non-disclosure scandal, PricewaterhouseCoopers, has called on a Federal Court judge to disqualify himself from hearing a major class action case initiated by the property group's aggrieved investors. Lawyers for PwC on Oct. 7 told Justice John Middleton in Melbourne that the accounting and audit firm believed adverse comments he made about the conduct of some PwC partners during another Centro case this year could give rise to claims that he was biased. They asked him to recuse himself from hearing the Centro class action, which is scheduled to begin early next year. Justice Middleton acceded to PwC's request, and management of the class action has been transferred to Justice Michelle Gordon. Justice Gordon has a busy corporations list in Melbourne; she is also hearing the class action against ANZ over fees charged to customers. Justice Middleton this year presided over a civil penalties case brought by the corporate regulator against eight former and serving Centro directors. The trial heard evidence from at least two PwC partners, including Stephen Cougle, who were central to the preparation and audit of Centro's accounts in 2006-07. Justice Middleton found the Centro directors breached their duties in late 2007 because they failed to pick up a substantial error in the group's accounts. Centro's 2006-07 accounts did not disclose that the company had billions of dollars that needed to be repaid within months. The mistake was detected by a junior PwC partner, who brought it to the attention of his managers who, in turn, raised it with Centro's accounting manager, Paul Belcher. The trial heard that no one at any stage pointed out the mistake to Centro's directors. Under cross-examination, Mr. Cougle revealed that he said nothing about the error during a board meeting where the accounts were being finalized. Justice Middleton found the Centro directors breached their duties because they failed to properly read, understand and focus on issues that were crucial in approving the financial statements. DELPHI AUTOMOTIVE: Sued Over Alleged Price-Fixing Conspiracy ------------------------------------------------------------ Lucha Bott, Jane M. Taylor and Jude A. Anheluk, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Delphi Automotive LLP; Furukawa Electric Co., Ltd.; Lear Corp.; Leoni AG; Sumitomo Electric Industries, Ltd.; [S-Y Systems Technologies GmbH; Yazaki Corp.; Yazaki North America, Inc., Case No. 3:11-cv-04949 (N.D. Calif., October 6, 2011) alleges that the Defendants are engaging in a massive, decade-long conspiracy to unlawfully fix and artificially raise the prices of Automotive Wire Harness Systems, which are automotive electrical distribution systems used to direct and control electronic components, wiring, and circuit boards in an automotive vehicle. The Plaintiffs contend that the Defendants' conspiracy successfully targeted the long-struggling United States automotive industry, raising prices for car manufacturers and consumers alike. The Plaintiffs say that competition authorities in the United States, the European Union and Japan have been investigating a conspiracy in the market for Automotive Wire Harness Systems since at least February 2010. Lucha Bott, a resident of Novato, California, contracted to purchase a 2009 Honda CRV. Jane M. Taylor, a resident of Kapaa, Hawaii, purchased a 2005 Toyota Prius. Jude A. Anheluk, a resident of Minneapolis, Minnesota, purchased a 2008 Toyota Camry. Delphi and Lear are Delaware corporations, while Yazaki North America is an Illinois corporation. Furukawa, Sumitomo and Yazaki Corp. are Japanese corporations. Leoni and S-Y Systems are German corporations. The Defendants manufacture, market, and sell Automotive Wire Harness Systems throughout the United States. A copy of the Complaint in Bott, et al. v. Delphi Automotive LLP, et al., Case No. 11-cv-04949 (N.D. Calif.), is available at: http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/10/07/AutoAntiT.pdf The Plaintiffs are represented by: Steve W. Berman, Esq. Anthony D. Shapiro, Esq. George W. Sampson, Esq. HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 1918 Eighth Avenue, Suite 3300 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 623-7292 Facsimile: (206) 623-0594 E-mail: steve@hbsslaw.com tony@hbsslaw.com george@hbsslaw.com - and - Jeff D. Friedman, Esq. HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202 Berkeley, CA 94710 Telephone: (510) 725-3000 Facsimile: (510) 725-3001 E-mail: jefff@hbsslaw.com - and - Elizabeth A. Fegan HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 820 North Boulevard, Suite B Oak Park, IL 60301 Telephone: (708) 776-5604 Facsimile: (708) 776-5601 E-mail: beth@hbsslaw.com EXXON MOBIL: Faces Class Action Over Yellowstone River Oil Spill ---------------------------------------------------------------- Stocks and Shares.TV reports that according to the class-action suit filed against Exxon Mobil Corporation in Yellowstone Country, the company spilled about 1,200 barrels of oil from its Silvertip pipeline into the Yellowstone River near Billings, Montana. It also claims that Exxon Mobil Corporation did a shoddy job of responding to the spill that occurred in last July. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of eight landowners who are seeking compensation for damage to their land and businesses. HONDA: Hagens Berman Files Class Action Over Price-Fixing Scheme ---------------------------------------------------------------- Hagens Berman on Oct. 6 filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of a group of Honda and Toyota automobile owners against eight auto-part suppliers after the federal government released information detailing an international price-fixing scheme that may have cost American purchasers and lessees of a wide range of cars millions of dollars in the form of inflated car prices over a 10-year period. The defendants supply automotive wire harnesses and related products in a wide range of Japanese- and American-built cars. According to the complaint, the defendants collectively dominate the global automotive wire harness systems market. Wire harnesses are used to direct and control electronic components, wiring and circuit boards in cars. Among the defendants is Furukawa Electric who was cited in an agreement announced last week in which three Furukawa Electric's executives agreed to plead guilty and pay a $200 million fine for the company's participation in the scheme, and three of its executives also agreed to serve prison terms ranging from a year to 18 months in U.S. prison for their role. "While the agreement with the federal government goes a long way to serve justice, it does nothing to remunerate the thousands of auto purchasers who appear to have overpaid for their vehicles," said Steve Berman, managing partner of Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro, a consumer-rights law firm headquartered in Seattle. "We intend to remedy that economic injustice with this filing." The vehicles purchased by plaintiffs during the class period include a 2009 Honda CRV, a 2005 Toyota Prius and a 2008 Toyota Camry. According to published documents, Furukawa employees Junichi Funo, Hirotsugu Nagata and Tetsuya Ukai -- executives who held executive positions in Japan and in the United States -- conspired to fix prices and agreed during meetings and conversations to allocate the supply of wire harnesses and other products on a model-by- model basis. The Justice Department states that the price-fixing scheme was in play from January 2000 until at least January 2010. Authorities from the U.S., the European Union and Japan have investigated a conspiracy in the market for automotive wire harness systems since Feb. 2010 or earlier. According to Mr. Berman, it's not clear which automobiles contain the harnesses, but it's possible that they are used by every major brand sold in the United States. "We don't yet know the scope and breadth of the impact of the price-fixing scheme on competitors, but we intend to find out through discovery," Mr. Berman said. "It is safe to say, though, that there are thousands of Toyota and Honda owners who likely overpaid, thanks to the Furukawa Three and their conspiracy." Hagens Berman is looking to speak with consumers who purchased new Honda or Toyota vehicles from January of 2000 to January of 2010 who may have paid more than necessary because of the artificially inflated cost of parts. The list of defendants also include Delphi Automotive, Lear Corporation, Leoni Ag, Sumitomo Electric Industries, S-Y Systems Technologies GMBH, Yazaki Corporation and Yazaki North America. Potential plaintiffs are invited to contact the firm by phone at 206-623-7292 or by e-mail at Furukawa@hbsslaw.com You can learn more about this case by visiting http://www.hbsslaw.com/Furukawa About Hagens Berman Seattle-based Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP -- http://www.hbsslaw.com-- represents workers, whistleblowers, investors and consumers in complex litigation. The firm has offices in Boston, Chicago, Colorado Springs, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, New York, Phoenix, San Francisco and Washington, D.C. Founded in 1993, HBSS continues to successfully fight for investor rights in large, complex litigation. HONORE-MERCIER: C. Difficile Victims to Split C$1MM Settlement -------------------------------------------------------------- CTV Montreal reports that more than 50 victims of a C. difficile outbreak at Honore-Mercier Hospital five years ago -- including the families of 16 people who died -- will split a C$1 million settlement of a class action law suit. For the families of those who died, the compensation would be in the range of C$25,000 to C$50,000, said lawyer Jean-Pierre Menard. A coroner's report investigating the deaths between May and November of 2006 was scathing -- hands insufficiently washed, rooms improperly disinfected and a serious lack of health and safety guidelines were prevalent at the hospital according to the report. "Everything that could lack, was lacking here," Mr. Menard said. "Everything that could be mismanaged was mismanaged here." Honore-Mercier Hospital officials say things have changed since 2006. "We work in a totally different manner," said spokesman Claude Dallaire. "We take a lot more precautions and now we have teams to control the spread of infection." This is the first time in Quebec history people who contracted C. difficile in a hospital were compensated financially. Were it not for the coroner's report, the case may never have gotten this far because proving culpability is difficult. For Sylvie Dorion, who spearheaded the class action suit, this settlement puts an end to a long, three-year journey. Ms. Dorion's sister Marie-Andree was one of the 16 people who died five years ago after the outbreak at the hospital, and the pain of that loss clearly remains. "My sister was my mother, my friend, my sister," Ms. Dorion said. "Oh, I miss her very, very much. I miss her every day." The suit was more a matter of principal for Ms. Dorion, because doing nothing simply wasn't an option. "I see my sister is looking at me," she said, "and saying it's done now, you can turn the page." INCO LTD: Ontario Court Dismisses Environmental Class Action ------------------------------------------------------------ Christine Dobby, writing for Financial Post, reports that the Ontario Court of Appeal has dismissed an environmental class action and reversed an award of C$36-million to a group of Port Colborne residents who claim their property values took a hit because of emissions from a nearby Inco Ltd. refinery. In a decision released on Oct. 7, a three-member panel of the court unanimously ruled that the plaintiffs did not prove that Inco was liable to them. Even if they had succeeded on that front, the court said, the plaintiffs failed to show any actual loss to Port Colborne's property appreciation rates. On top of throwing out the claims, the court ordered the plaintiffs to pay C$100,000 in costs to Inco. In one of the first class action lawsuits to go to trial, Judge Joseph Henderson of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice on July 6, 2010 ordered Inco to pay three sub-groups of plaintiffs a total of C$36-million in damages. Now owned by Vale Canada Ltd., Inco operated a nickel refinery in the small town on the north shore of Lake Erie from 1918 to 1984. The Court of Appeal said Inco complied with contemporary environmental and regulatory rules, but emissions from the 500- foot smoke stack on the refinery led to a build-up of nickel particles in the soil in the surrounding area. Although there was no suggestion of threat to human health, the issue began to attract public attention in 2000 when the Ministry of the Environment released the results of a phytotoxicology study, the court said in its decision. This report on the effects of nickel levels on plant life identified "hot spots" where the levels were very high. The Ministry eventually ordered Inco to "remediate" 25 properties with particularly high levels, which involved removing the soil to a certain level and replacing it with new soil. This was completed by 2004, although Ellen Smith, the representative plaintiff, would not allow Inco to remediate her land. The class of claimants included everyone who owned residential property in an area that covers most of Port Colborne, approximately 7,000 properties. They alleged that because of the public health concerns the nickel deposits provoked, their property values did not increase at the same rate as comparable values in other small cities nearby. The Court of Appeal said the plaintiffs did not prove Inco was liable to them. "People do not live in splendid isolation from one another. One person's lawful and reasonable use of his property may indirectly harm the property of another or interfere with that person's ability to fully use and enjoy his or her property," the court said. It said the plaintiffs' nuisance claim failed because they could not show "actual, substantial physical damage" to their property that posed some risk to the residents' health or well-being. Concern generated by fear of a public health risk was insufficient, the court said. The court said the plaintiffs also failed to establish strict liability and even if they had, the evidence did not prove that property values were negatively affected. The case was certified as a class action in February 2006 and worked its way through the court system to a three-month trial that started in October 2009. The court heard Inco's appeal from the trial decision over four days in May. Lawyers for both sides were not immediately available for comment, but David Sterns, a lawyer at Sotos LLP in Toronto, said he suspects the plaintiffs will likely seek leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada. "You always have to imagine the worst-case scenario when you take on a case and this comes pretty close to that," he said. "I take my hat off to the plaintiffs that they pushed the case as far as they did, and they'll probably push it further." Mr. Sterns, who frequently represents plaintiffs in class action cases, called the Oct. 7 ruling a "dramatic reversal" in "a marathon dispute between people in a community and a very large company." "Everybody else follows in the path that these cases blaze," he said, noting that only a limited number of cases go all the way to trial. James Sullivan, a litigation partner in Blake Cassels & Graydon LLP's Vancouver office, has represented defendants in numerous class action lawsuits. Reflecting on the decision, he said he believes many "speculative claims" being advanced as class actions will ultimately be dismissed. "I suspect it will cause plaintiffs' counsel to reconsider the viability of environmental class actions," he said. "However, given the relatively low threshold for certification, I suspect we will continue to see them." Mr. Sterns acknowledged that the court's ruling stands as a reminder of the downside risk of taking cases like this on as a lawyer or pursuing them as a plaintiff but said it wouldn't discourage them entirely. "I think it will remind people they better have the commitment and resources when they start these cases, and be prepared to take them all the way," he said. KEYBASE FINANCIAL: Class Certification Hearing Set for June ----------------------------------------------------------- A certification hearing in the class-action suit against former Truro financial advisor John Alexander Allen and Keybase Financial Group Inc. has been set for next June 27 and 28. Truro solicitor Robert Pineo filed the action against Mr. Allen in Nova Scotia Supreme Court last December on behalf of Stewiacke residents Ruth and Dawn Osborne and at least 35 other unnamed individuals. Last June, the Nova Scotia Securities Commission fined Mr. Allen more than C$1 million for bilking dozens of clients out of an estimated C$14 million. Mr. Allen was ordered to pay $1.05 million to the commission and C$7,000 in investigation and proceedings costs after he admitted in an agreed statement of facts to violating the Securities Act and engaging in unfair practices. Any claims against Allen must be identified by December 15. The proposed Class Definition is any person who: A) Was a client or former client of Keybase Financial Group Inc., ("Keybase") and John Alexander Allen ("Allen") during the period of March 23, 2007 and August 28, 2007; and, B) On the advice and actions of Allen, entered into leveraged investments strategies by purchasing "distribution paying mutual funds" financed by loans inappropriately arranged by the Allen ("the Allen Strategy"). The hearing will take place at the Supreme Court building at 1 Church St., Truro, beginning at 9:30 a.m. each day. The Supreme Court claim alleges that Allen advised clients to participate in inappropriate investment schemes beyond their risk tolerances, including leveraged investment schemes and that he obtained loans for the applicants from financial institutions by mis-representing their factual circumstances. The claim alleges that these clients sustained significant financial losses as a result. Mr. Allen was registered with the commission from January 1993 to September 2007 and worked as a mutual fund salesperson with Keybase Financial Group in Truro for six months in 2007. LCD PANEL MANUFACTURERS: Retailers Can Continue Antitrust Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- Nick McCann at Courthouse News Service reports that a class of electronics retailers can continue their claims against LCD panel manufacturers including Toshiba, Hitachi and Epson, among others, a federal judge ruled after finding the suit is not barred because it deals with foreign trade. The plaintiffs claim that the electronics manufacturers engaged in a global price-fixing conspiracy to raise prices and restrict competition in the sales of computer monitors, laptops, televisions and other LCD products. U.S. District Judge Susan Illston previously agreed that defendants "secretly conspired" to raise prices on LCD devices to "supra-competitive" levels. However, the defendant manufacturers say the class claims are barred by the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act because the lawsuit involves "trade or commerce . . . with foreign nations." The defendants also said the class' state-law claims should be dismissed because that Act "operates to constrain state antitrust laws from regulating where federal law does not." The plaintiffs said the "domestic effect exception" applies in this case because there was sufficient evidence that the alleged conspiracy had direct effect on the United States. Judge Illston treated the defendants' motion as one for summary judgment, and agreed with the plaintiffs that the manufacturers' alleged price-fixing conspiracy had direct effects on American companies. "In price-fixing cases such as this one, defendants would limit a 'direct effect' to the financial harm caused by the first sale of a price-fixed product," she wrote. "(B)ecause the effect of defendants' anticompetitive conduct did not change significantly between the beginning of the process (overcharges for LCD panels) and the end (overcharges for televisions, monitors, and notebook computers), the effect 'proceeded without deviation or interruption' from the LCD manufacturer to the American retail store," Judge Illston found. "No intervening events interrupted its journey," she continued. The judge denied defendants' joint motion for summary judgment on the indirect purchaser claims based on foreign sales. A copy of the Order Denying Defendants' Joint Dispositive Motion Regarding Indirect Purchaser Claims Based on Foreign Sales in In Re: TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation, Case No. 07-md- 01827 (N.D. Calif.), is available at http://is.gd/losqP2 PHILIPS ELECTRONICS: Class Action Settlement Gets Initial Okay -------------------------------------------------------------- The law firms of Chimicles & Tikellis LLP, Horwitz, Horwitz & Paradis, and Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC disclosed that on October 3, 2011, the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey granted preliminary approval to a proposed class action settlement with Philips Electronics North America Corporation. The settlement proposes to resolve lawsuits that allege certain Philips and Magnavox televisions suffer from a defect that causes internal components (called capacitors) to prematurely fail, resulting in the televisions becoming inoperable. The proposed settlement would entitle qualifying settlement class members, who purchased new or received as a gift new one of the Philips or Magnavox plasma televisions with the model numbers listed below, to monetary benefits or vouchers. The model numbers of the Philips and Magnavox plasma televisions included in the proposed class action settlement are: 50PF9830A/37 42PF9630A/37 50PF9731D/37 42PF7321D/37 50PF9631D/37 42PF7320A/37 50PF9630A/37 42PF7220A/37 50PF9431D/37 42PF5321D/37 50PF7321D/37 50MF231D/37 50PF7320A/37 50PF7220A/37 In addition, only those television sets with a serial number reflecting a manufacturing date between November 1, 2005, through December 31, 2006, qualify for participation in this settlement. The Court has scheduled a hearing on December 15, 2011, at 10:30 a.m. to determine whether to grant final approval to the settlement. To be eligible to receive the benefits made available pursuant to this settlement, class members must submit to the claims administrator a claim form that is postmarked by February 28, 2012. To obtain additional information about the settlement, to determine whether your television qualifies, or to obtain a claim form, you can visit the settlement Web site at http://www.PhilipsPlasmaTVsettlement.com You can also contact the settlement administrator by calling (855) 477-4407, or by writing to Philips Plasma TV Settlement, c/o Dahl, Inc., P.O. Box 2061, Faribault, MN 55021. The class members are represented by: Steven A. Schwartz, Esq. Benjamin F. Johns, Esq. CHIMICLES & TIKELLIS LLP 361 W. Lancaster Avenue Haverford, PA 19041 Office: (610) 642-8500 Fax: (610) 649-3633 E-mail: SteveSchwartz@chimicles.com BenJohns@chimicles.com Michael A. Schwartz, Esq. Justin Shane, Esq. HORWITZ, HORWITZ & PARADIS 570 Seventh Avenue 20th Floor New York, NY 10018 Tel: (212) 986-4500 Fax: (212) 986-4501 E-mail: mschwartz@hhplawny.com JShane@hhplawny.com Andrew N. Friedman, Esq. Douglas J. McNamara, Esq. COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL PLLC 1100 New York Ave, NW Suite 500, West Tower Washington, D.C. 20005 Tel: (202) 408-4600 Fax: (202) 408-4699 E-mail: afriedman@cohenmilstein.com dmcnamara@cohenmilstein.com POWERCOR: Black Saturday Bushfire Class Action Nears Settlement --------------------------------------------------------------- Michelle Draper, writing for The Australian Associated Press, reports that a class action launched by farmers against an electricity distributor over the Black Saturday bushfires in Victoria's west is close to settlement. The parties reached an in-principle settlement agreement in relation to liability on the final day of a five-week trial held in Horsham. The class action was brought by lead plaintiff farmer Laurie Thomas against electricity company Powercor. The trial heard the Horsham fire on February 7, 2009, burnt nearly 2,500 hectares, destroying 13 homes and many more buildings. Barrister Tim Tobin, SC, for the plaintiff, said the fire was sparked by a live power line that fell from a pole and ignited grass. He alleged Powercor breached its duty to operate safely and his clients were claiming loss and damages for these breaches. It was alleged several screws on the power line in question had come loose before the 2009 bushfires. Powercor's decision to move from three-yearly inspections of electricity infrastructure to inspections every five years had contributed to the failure of its assets, Mr. Tobin said in his opening statement to the trial. He said Powercor was aware of the risks associated with its power lines but had accepted them, rather than take proactive action, for commercial reasons. During his opening, David Curtain, QC, for Powercor, accepted that the fire was caused by a falling power line, but said only one screw had become loose before February 2009 on the pole in question. Mr. Curtain said electricity provision was inherently dangerous and the risk could be managed, but not eliminated. He said Powercor's maintenance regime was reasonable and rejected criticisms of the company's move to five-year inspections of electricity infrastructure, saying it was the norm in the industry and had led to improved training of inspectors. Mr. Thomas was claiming damages of more than AUD300,000. Under the class action, other parties who suffered damages were also seeking compensation. The settlement will be subject to approval by a Supreme Court judge not presiding over the trial. Subject to the settlement's approval, a hearing has been scheduled before Justice Jack Forrest next Wednesday for an assessment of damages. A Powercor spokesman said the company would not comment before the settlement was finalized. QUICKEN LOANS: Accused of Secretly Recording Phone Calls -------------------------------------------------------- Wayne Buder, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Quicken Loans, Inc., a California corporation; and Does 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. CIV1104412, (Calif. Super. Ct., Marin Cty., September 6, 2011) is brought in connection with the Defendants' policy and practice of secretly recording telephone calls with persons located in California without the persons' consent, in violation of Sections 632 and 632.7 of the California Penal Code. Mr. Buder is a resident of Marin County, California. He says that he received and answered calls from the Defendants concerning his efforts to obtain a home loan. He alleges that the Defendants recorded each of the calls, without his consent and without informing him that the calls would be recorded. Quicken Loans is a Michigan Corporation, with its principal place of business in Detroit, Michigan. Quicken Loans is a nationwide residential mortgage lender. The true names and capacities of the Doe Defendants are currently unknown to the Plaintiff. The Company removed the lawsuit on October 6, 2011, from the Superior Court of the state of California, County of Marin, to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. The Company argues that the District Court has original jurisdiction over this Action and because the matter in controversy exceeds the sum of $75,000 and is between citizens of different states. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:11-cv-04955 to the proceeding. The Plaintiff is represented by: Clifford H. Pearson, Esq. Daniel L. Warshaw, Esq. Bobby Pouya, Esq. PEARSON, SIMON, WARSHAW & PENNY, LLP 15165 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 400 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Telephone: (818) 788-8300 Facsimile: (818) 788-8104 E-mail: cpearson@pswplaw.com dwarshaw@pswplaw.com bpouya@pswplaw.com - and - George S. Trevor, Esq. PEARSON, SIMON, WARSHAW & PENNY, LLP 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2450 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 433-9000 Facsimile: (415) 433-9008 - and - Richard B. Wentz, Esq. Jean M. Wentz, Esq. THE WENTZ LAW FIRM 2955 East Hillcrest Drive, Suite 123 Thousand Oaks, CA 91362 Telephone: (805) 374-0060 Facsimile: (888) 855-8124 The Defendants are represented by: James G. Snell, Esq. Heather L. Shook, Esq. BINGHAM MCCUTCHEN LLP 1117 S. California Avenue Palo Alto, CA 94304-1106 Telephone: (650) 849-4400 Facsimile: (650) 849-4800 E-mail: james.snell@bingham.com heather.shook@bingham.com REEBOK: Settles Class Action Over Toning Shoes & Apparel -------------------------------------------------------- GCG, Inc., in its capacity as the Court-appointed Notice Administrator in In re Reebok EasyTone Litigation, 4:10-CV-11977- FDS (D. Mass.), issued a statement regarding the case. If you purchased eligible Reebok toning shoes and/or apparel (listed below) from December 5, 2008, through October 12, 2011 your rights may be affected by a proposed class action settlement. You are a Class Member and may be eligible to receive a payment if you purchased eligible toning shoes and/or apparel from Reebok and/or its authorized retailers and/or wholesalers from December 5, 2008, through October 12, 2011, with limited exclusions. Eligible Shoes: Easy Tone, JumpTone, EasyTone Flip, SimplyTone, RunTone, SlimTone, TrainTone Eligible Apparel: EasyTone Capri, EasyTone Long Bra Top, EasyTone Pants, EasyTone Sleeveless Shirt, EasyTone Shorts, EasyTone Short Sleeve Top The lawsuit alleges that Reebok violated certain state laws regarding the marketing and sale of toning shoes and apparel. Reebok denies all wrongdoing. The Court did not decide which side was right. Instead, the parties have decided to settle. The parties believe the proposed settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate and it will provide substantial benefit to the Class. The settlement utilizes the same $25 million fund announced recently with the FTC, less the costs of notice and settlement administration, to pay claims to eligible Class Members relating to the purchase of Eligible Shoes and Eligible Apparel. Reebok shall separately pay attorneys' fees and costs and class representative awards. All payments under the settlement must be approved by the court. Reebok is also agreeing to make certain conduct changes. The Settlement Agreement and information on filing a claim is at http://www.reeboksettlement.com The lawsuit was resolved in conjunction with Reebok's earlier settlement with the Federal Trade Commission, which was announced on September 28, 2011. Working together, plaintiffs, Reebok and FTC agreed that the $25 million could be used to pay refunds to all consumers, less costs of notice and settlement administration. Consumers who heard about the FTC settlement and filed a claim on- line will receive notice about the class action settlement in the near future. To be eligible for a payment, Class Members must send in a completed claim form electronically submitted no later than April 10, 2012, or postmarked no later than April 10, 2012. Payment amounts to eligible Class Members will vary depending upon, among other factors, the product(s) purchased, the number and amounts claimed by all Class Members and other adjustments and deductions. The amount could be more (up to double), the same, or less than $50 for each pair of Eligible Shoes, $40 for each EasyTone Capri and EasyTone Pants, and $25 for each applicable shirt, bra top and top. If you are a Class Member, you may (1) do nothing; (2) exclude yourself; (3) send in a Claim Form; and/or (4) object to the settlement. Claim Forms must be electronically submitted to the Claims Administrator no later than April 10, 2012, or postmarked no later than April 10, 2012. Objections must be filed with the Court by December 28, 2011. Requests to exclude yourself must be postmarked no later than December 28, 2011. Requests to appear must be received no later than December 28, 2011. The detailed notice describes how to file a claim, object, or exclude yourself and provides other important information. The Court will hold a hearing on January 17, 2012, at 2:30 p.m. in the federal courthouse, courtroom 2, Donohue Federal Building, 595 Main Street, Worcester, Massachusetts, to consider final approval of the settlement. The class is represented by Timothy G. Blood of Blood Hurst & O'Reardon LLP, Milberg LLP, and Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLC, which were all designated by the Court as Interim Class Counsel in In re Reebok EasyTone Litigation, 4:10-CV-11977-FDS (D. Mass.). To obtain a detailed notice, claim form or other documents, visit http://www.reeboksettlement.comor call, toll-free, 1-888-398-5389 or write to Notice Administrator, In re Reebok EasyTone Litigation, c/o GCG, Inc., P.O. Box 9770, Dublin, OH 43017-5670. SINOTECH ENERGY: Class Action Lead Plaintiff Deadline Nears ----------------------------------------------------------- Several class action lawsuits have been filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of purchasers of the American Depository Shares of SinoTech Energy Limited between November 3, 2010, and August 16, 2011, including purchasers of SinoTech's ADS traceable to the Company's Initial Public Offering on or about November 3, 2010. The lawsuit alleges that SinoTech failed to disclose the following material adverse information: (a) the Company's five largest subcontracting customers and its sole chemical supplier seem to be shell companies; (b) the Company's financial results filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission were inconsistent with financial filings made to Chinese authorities; and (c) the Offering Materials issued in connection with the Company's November 3, 2010, IPO were materially misleading and inaccurate. On August 16, 2011, a report was issued by Alfred Little demonstrating that SinoTech's business was smaller than it had represented to investors in its SEC filings. The report contained a number of revelations into SinoTech, including information that the Company's sole import agent, sole chemical supplier, and five largest subcontracting customers, all appeared to be shell companies with little or no actual operations. Following the release of the report, SinoTech's ADS declined over 41% to $1.67 per share, on unusually heavy trading volume. Later on August 16, 2011, NASDAQ halted trading in SinoTech's ADS, pending further information from the company. If you purchased SinoTech's ADS during the Class Period you may, no later than October 18, 2011, request that the court appoint you lead plaintiff of the proposed class. A lead plaintiff is a class member that represents other class members in directing the litigation. Your share in any recovery will not be affected by serving as a lead plaintiff, however, lead plaintiffs make important decisions that could affect the overall recovery for class members. You do not need to be a lead plaintiff to recover. You may retain Milberg LLP, or other attorneys, for this action, but do not need to retain counsel to recover. If this action is certified as a class action, class members will be automatically represented by court-appointed counsel. The complaints in this action were not filed by Milberg. Milberg LLP -- http://www.milberg.com-- has represented individual and institutional investors for over four decades and serves as lead counsel in courts throughout the United States. If you wish to discuss this matter with us, please contact the following attorneys: Jeff Westerman, Esq. One California Plaza 300 South Grand Avenue, Suite 3900 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Andrei V. Rado, Esq. MILBERG LLP One Pennsylvania Plaza 49th Floor New York, NY 10119 Telephone: (800) 320-5081 E-mail: contactus@milberg.com SONY: Sued for Billing Unauthorized Music "Subscriptions" --------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that a federal RICO class action accuses Sony and Dada Entertainment of running a "common criminal enterprise to steal money from unsuspecting consumers" by billing for unauthorized music "subscriptions" for wireless phones. STATE OF MICHIGAN: Sued Over Poor Performance of Contract CNAs -------------------------------------------------------------- Glynis Farrell at Courthouse News Service reports that privatization of the Grand Rapids Home for Veterans endangers more than 500 of its residents, veterans say in a class action. The state laid off 170 workers on Oct. 1 and replaced them with a private contractor whose workers have a wretched record of abuse, including one who "broke two of the fingers of a veteran, and actually bragged about it," the vets say. Lead plaintiff Anthony Spallone sued the State of Michigan Department of Military and Veterans' Affairs in Ingham County Court, on behalf of himself and more than 500 other veterans. Mr. Spallone says that in an ostensible quest to save money, the state laid off 170 resident care aides and replaced them with a private contractor that has a terrible track record, including leaving veterans in "urine-soaked beds for hours on end." The state hired J2S Group, which formerly provided only supplemental nursing care, backing up state workers. But on Oct. 1, Michigan handed over "the entire nursing assistant operation to the private company," which the veterans say "has a poor, even dangerous track record of care." J2S Group is not named as a defendant. But the veterans say J2S workers have been accused of a litany of abuse, including ripping a feeding tube out of a resident's stomach, breaking the fingers of another resident and bragging about it, and that one "invalid veteran . . . fell and broke his neck which a contract CNA, who was supposed to be caring for him, walked out of the room." Mr. Spallone, a Vietnam veteran, says he has seen residents fall more than 15 times while in the care of contract employees. The Grand Rapids Home for veterans is funded by the State of Michigan General Fund, residents' fees, Medicare and the U.S Department of Veterans Administration. The center employs 500 nurses and aides to provide care to 600 residents and their families. Resident care aides assist the veterans in eating, bathing, dressing, social activities and emergency medical care when needed. J2S aides "have been known to abuse residents," the complaint states. "One contract employee would leave residents in urine-soaked beds. Residents have been bruised and have broken bones as a result of the negligence of J2S contract employees." "An invalid veteran fell off the bed and broke his neck, after a contract CNA left him on the bed, unsecure, and left the room," the class claims. "A contract CNA fed a resident by mouth, when there were specific instructions, (including a sign above his bed) indicating that the veteran was not to be fed by mouth. Later, the contract CNA pulled the feeding tube out of the veteran's stomach -- the veteran was hospitalized; . . . Mr. Spallone claims J2S workers were accused of "literally walking off during their shift, never to return that shift and abandoning the veterans." The state replaced 171 nurses aides with private contractors last Saturday, according to the complaint. Mr. Spallone says that one former J2S worker stated in a deposition, that "there are some veterans who refuse treatment and service by the contract CNAs from J2S Group. She discusses how, on average, 10 out of the 15 persons scheduled to work on a shift would call off, and the other 5 would be hours late." This worker stated that her entire training consisted of shadowing another worker for 8 hours, that many J2S workers have no experience in nursing care, and that J2S provides "little to no oversight" of its workers. Mr. Spallone seeks an injunction and restraining order. A copy of the Complaint in Spallone v. State of Michigan Department of Military and Veterans' Affairs, Case No. 11-1041-CZ (Mich. Cir. Ct., Ingham Cty.), is available at: http://www.courthousenews.com/2011/10/07/VAMich.pdf The Plaintiff is represented by: Richard G. Mack, Jr., Esq. Ada Veloren, Esq. Keith D. Flynn, Esq. MILLER COHEN, P.L.C. 600 West Lafayette - 4th Floor Detroit, MI 48226 Telephone: (313) 964-4454 SYNGENTA CROP: Petitions for Review in Atrazine Suit Denied ----------------------------------------------------------- Steve Korris, writing for The Madison St. Clair Record, reports that Madison County Circuit Judge William Mudge must carry out Circuit Judge Barbara Crowder's order requiring agricultural trade groups, researchers and consultants to disclose their activities to Stephen Tillery, who hasn't sued any of them. On Sept. 28, the Illinois Supreme Court denied petitions for review from atrazine maker Syngenta Crop Protection Services and the Heartland Institute in Chicago. Judge Crowder declared information about lobbying efforts of third parties relevant to Mr. Tillery's claim that they helped Syngenta conceal the harm atrazine causes. Fifth District appellate judges had denied review of both petitions in January. Heartland president Joseph Bast swore last year that identifying contributors would expose them to demonization and might cost him half his support. The case passed from Judge Crowder to Judge Mudge after Chief Judge Ann Callis assigned Judge Crowder to the asbestos docket full time. The Supreme Court action frees U.S. Magistrate Judge Byron Cudmore to decide whether to enforce subpoenas Mr. Tillery obtained at federal court in Springfield. Mr. Tillery asserted federal jurisdiction because he maintains a parallel suit against Syngenta at federal court in Benton. Judge Cudmore stayed motions of Illinois Farm Bureau, Illinois Fertilizer Chemical Association, and Chemical Industry Council to quash the subpoenas, pending Supreme Court action. Mr. Tillery obtained a subpoena against Heartland Institute at federal court in Chicago, but District Judge Samuel Der-Yeghiayan quashed it. Mr. Tillery represents public and private water suppliers in six Corn Belt states seeking to declare atrazine harmful in any concentration. Federal regulators consider it safe up to three parts per billion, but Mr. Tillery claims his clients can hold Syngenta to a tighter standard. Judge Mudge plans a hearing on pending motions on Friday, Oct. 21. TRAVELZOO INC: Class Action Lead Plaintiff Deadline Nears ---------------------------------------------------------- Bernstein Liebhard LLP on Oct. 7 disclosed that only four days remain to file a motion for lead plaintiff in the securities class action filed against Travelzoo, Inc. A lawsuit was filed in August 2011, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of a class of investors who purchased Travelzoo common stock between the period of April 21, 2011, through July 21, 2011. The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Travelzoo and certain of its officers issued a series of materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business and prospects. On July 21, 2011, defendants revealed that the Company was performing well below expectations, with revenues well below estimates, and expenses exceeding estimates. Upon this news, shares of Travelzoo stock plummeted more than 30 percent, from a closing price of $85.71 per share on July 20, 2011, to $56.00 the following day. Plaintiffs seek to recover damages on behalf of all Class members who purchased or otherwise acquired shares of Travelzoo during the Class Period. If you purchased or otherwise acquired Travelzoo shares during the Class Period, and either lost money on the transaction or still hold the shares, you may wish to join in this action to serve as lead plaintiff. In order to do so, you must meet certain requirements set forth in the applicable law and file appropriate papers no later than October 11, 2011. A "lead plaintiff" is a representative party that acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. In order to be appointed lead plaintiff, the court must determine that the class member's claim is typical of the claims of other class members, and that the class member will adequately represent the class. Under certain circumstances, one or more class members may together serve as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery is not, however, affected by the decision whether or not to serve as a lead plaintiff. You may retain Bernstein Liebhard LLP, or other counsel of your choice, to serve as your counsel in this action. If you are interested in discussing your rights as a Travelzoo shareholder and/or have information relating to the matter, please contact: Joseph R. Seidman, Jr., Esq. BERNSTEIN LIEBHARD LLP 10 East 40th Street New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (877) 779-1414 E-mail: seidman@bernlieb.com Web site: http://www.bernlieb.com Bernstein Liebhard has pursued hundreds of securities, consumer and shareholder rights cases and recovered almost $3 billion for its clients. It has been named to The National Law Journal's "Plaintiffs' Hot List" in each of the last eight years. You can obtain a copy of the complaint from the clerk of the court for the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. ZIONS BANK: Faces Class Action Over Debit Card Overdraft Fees ------------------------------------------------------------- Dennis Romboy, writing for Deseret News, reports that Zions Bank faces a class action over its debit card overdraft practices. On Aug. 8, 2009, Melinda Barlow started the day with $29.53 in her checking account. Using her debit card, she bought meals at Del Taco for $6.43 and Big Daddy's Pizza for $6.89, spent $33.21 at Walmart and made a $139.74 insurance payment. At the end of the day, her account showed a negative balance of $156.74. Taking the transactions from the highest dollar amount to the lowest, Zions Bank charged her $100 in overdraft fees -- $25 for each transaction, according to court records. Had the bank taken the charges from lowest to highest, Barlow would have paid $50 in overdraft fees. In a federal class-action lawsuit filed this week, attorneys for Ms. Barlow are challenging Zions Bank's overdraft policies and practices -- which they contend "made it extremely difficult, if not impossible" for customers to avoid overdraft fees even if they carefully monitored their checking accounts. Three high-powered law firms represent the Sandy woman and other possible plaintiffs -- Anderson & Karrenberg in Salt Lake City, Boston-based Shapiro Haber & Urmy, and Kronenberger Burgoyne in San Francisco. One of the suit's primary contentions is that from 2005 to 2010, the bank intentionally ordered customers' checking account transactions to make as much money as possible from overdraft fees. "Zions Bank manipulated and altered the order in which debit transactions were 'posted' to its customers' accounts in order to maximize the number of overdrafts in those accounts, thereby maximizing the overdraft fees that it charged its customers," according to the 38-page complaint. In many cases, customers' accounts were not actually overdrawn either at the time of the debit transaction or at the time the overdraft fees were charged, the suit alleges. As a result, the lawsuit says, customers were charged unreasonable fees. "Zions Bank's collection of those excessive fees is patently unconscionable and unfair." The lawsuit also claims Zions doesn't uniformly post deposits to checking accounts before debit transactions, resulting in more overdraft fees. A spokeswoman for Zions Bank said the company does not comment on pending litigation. Based in Salt Lake City, the company has branches in 10 Western states. In May 2011, Zions apparently began processing debit card and ATM transactions from lowest dollar amount to highest, according to its customer deposit agreement. The lawsuit questions whether that is happening and claims the bank has not followed "best practices" for the industry over the years. ********* S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Frederick, Maryland USA. Leah Felisilda, Noemi Irene A. Adala, Joy A. Agravante, Julie Anne Lopez, Christopher Patalinghug, Frauline Abangan and Peter A. Chapman, Editors. Copyright 2011. All rights reserved. ISSN 1525-2272. This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior written permission of the publishers. Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but is not guaranteed. The CAR subscription rate is $575 for six months delivered via e-mail. Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof are $25 each. For subscription information, contact Christopher Beard at 240/629-3300. * * * End of Transmission * * *