/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/140128.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Tuesday, January 28, 2014, Vol. 16, No. 19
Headlines
ABBOTT LABS: Lieff Cabraser Comments on Removal of Gay Juror
ADVANCE AMERICA: Payday Loans Violate State Law, Suit Claims
AMERICAN FAMILY: Removed "Doss" Insurance Suit to W.D. Arkansas
APPLE INC: To Settle FTC Charges Over Mobile Apps for $32.5MM
APPLE INC: Tech Firms May Face $9+ Bil. in Damages
AUSTRALIA: Class Action to Challenge Worker Underpayment Scheme
CESS LLC: Fails to Pay OT and Minimum Wages, "Bravo" Suit Says
CITADEL PLAZA: Asbestos Cleanup to Start at Development Site
CLAYTON WILLIAMS: Awaits Finality of Accord in Suit Over Lease
COLLECTO INC: Faces Suit Alleging Debt Collection Act Violations
COOPER TIRE: Faces Securities Class Action in Delaware
COVERAGE ONE: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime Premium, Suit Claims
CREDIT CONTROL: Faces "Davis" Suit Over FDCPA Violations in N.Y.
CRESTPARK DEWITT: "Moss" FLSA Suit Won't Proceed as Class Action
CYPRESS CREEK: Faces Class Action Over Alleged Fraud
DEPUY ORTHOPAEDICS: "Bozarth" Suit Moved to ASR Hip Implant MDL
DESIGNED RECEIVABLE: Faces "Lowenbein" Class Suit in New York
EQUITY LIFESTYLE: Court Approves Accord in Suit Over Rent Rules
EQUITY LIFESTYLE: Thousand Trails "Members" Settle Claims
EXPERIAN INFORMATION: Violates Rights Under FCRA, Suit Claims
FACEBOOK INC: Ninth Circuit May Look Into User ID Claims
FIRST CONCEPT: Fails to Properly Pay Overtime Wages, Suit Claims
FORD MOTOR: Redoubles Effort to Prevent Vehicle Quality Woes
FORD MOTOR: Recalls Edge Model Due to Possible Fuel Leakage
FORD MOTOR: Recalls Explorer Model Due to Possible Defect
FOREST LABORATORIES: Judge Certifies Celexa, Lexapro Class Action
FOREST RIVER: Recalls 123 Trailers Due to Inadequate Clearance
GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls Sierra and Silverado Models
GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 370,000 Full-Size Trucks Over Fire Hazard
GENPACT SERVICES: Sued for Violating Fair Debt Collection Act
GLADSTONE PORT: Judge Adjourns Application to Strike Class Action
HARVEST MANAGEMENT: "Cwik" Suit Settlement Gets Final Approval
HOMEWARD RESIDENTIAL: Loses Bid to Stay Discovery in Adams Case
INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL: Sends Unauthorized Text Ads, Suit Claims
ISERVE RESIDENTIAL: Accord in "Simmons" Suit Has Final Approval
KENNA COMPANY: Class Seeks Unpaid Overtime and Wages Under FLSA
KINNIKINNICK FOODS: Recalls Products Due to Undeclared Milk
LANE FURNITURE: Chests Pose Child Death Risk Long After Recall
LENNOX NATIONAL: Won't Pay Workers for All Hours Worked, Suit Says
LONDON DRUGS: Recalls Nika-S Pomegranate Juice
LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: Faces Third Class Action Over Formaldehyde
MABIM INTERNATIONAL: Sued for Infliction of Emotional Distress
MAC ACQUISITION: Class Seeks to Recover Minimum & Overtime Wages
MOVING COMPANY: Fails to Pay Overtime Compensation, Suit Claims
NELSON & KENNARD: Trial Court Judgment in "Tourgeman" Suit Flipped
NEW JERSEY: Governor Faces Class Actions Over Bridge Lane Closure
NEW JERSEY: Gov. Adds Gibson Dunn as Counsel in Bridge Class Suit
NEW YORK, NY: Settles Claims in Suit Over Mass Arrests for $18MM
NORTH CAROLINA: Faces Class Action Over Medicaid Payment System
PEOPLES BANCORP: Wants N.C. Court to Strike Certification Motion
STRICK: Recalls Trailer Due to Defective Rear Impact Guard Gussets
TARGET CORP: Senators Introduce Data Security Act After Breach
TOYOTA MOTOR: Recalls Matrix Cars Due to Incorrect Tire Size Info
UNFI CANADA: Recalls Alprose Swiss Baking Choco Due to Allergen
UNITED STATES: Tech Companies Seek Surveillance Program Reforms
USEC INC: 6th Cir. Upholds Dismissal of Ohio Labor Class Suit
* American Tort Reform Foundation Publishes Judicial Hellholes
* NERA Records 100 Securities Class Action Settlements in 2013
*********
ABBOTT LABS: Lieff Cabraser Comments on Removal of Gay Juror
------------------------------------------------------------
Commenting on the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit barring the removal of a prospective juror from jury
service because the juror is gay or lesbian, Lieff Cabraser
attorney Brendan P. Glackin -- bglackin@lchb.com -- stated, "The
decision is an important milestone in ending prejudice and stigma
against gays and lesbians in our society. Any time the government
seeks to discriminate on the basis of a person's sexual
orientation, it now must demonstrate a legitimate purpose
justifying the disparate treatment, and this purpose will be
subjected to heightened scrutiny by the Courts."
Mr. Glackin was a member of the team of plaintiffs' attorneys in
the antitrust litigation against Abbott Laboratories whose
challenge of the exclusion of a gay juror served as the basis for
the successful appeal by GlaxoSmithKline. The Lieff Cabraser team
had principal responsibility for jury selection and asserted that
Abbott's removal of the only self-identified gay juror was
impermissibly made on the basis of sexual orientation in violation
of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986).
"We anticipated Abbott might do this given the nature of the case,
and had a strategy and research prepared in advance," said
Mr. Glackin.
Lieff Cabraser served as co-counsel for a group of retailers
charging that Abbott Laboratories monopolized the market for AIDS
medicines used in conjunction with Abbott's prescription drug
Norvir. These drugs, known as Protease Inhibitors, have enabled
patients with HIV to fight off the disease and live longer.
Trial commenced in February 2011. After opening statements and
the presentation of four witnesses and evidence to the jury, the
retailer plaintiffs and Abbott Laboratories entered into a $52
million settlement. GlaxoSmithKline continued to litigate its
individual claims against Abbott Laboratories.
ADVANCE AMERICA: Payday Loans Violate State Law, Suit Claims
------------------------------------------------------------
Elizabeth A. Burger, Individually and on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated, 5872 Albany Ru, Westerville, OH 43081;
and Patricia A. Martaus, Individually and on behalf of herself and
all others similarly situated, 1070 South Cassingham Road, Apt. C,
Columbus, OH 43209 v. Advance America Small Loans Of Ohio, Inc.,
dba Advance America Cash Advance Centers; and dba Advance America
Cash Advance; and dba Advance America, c/o CSC-Lawyers
Incorporating Service, 50 West Broad Street, Suite 1800, Columbus,
OH 43215, et al., Case No. 2:14-cv-00010-MHW-TPK (S.D. Ohio,
January 6, 2014) is brought on behalf of a Class of persons in the
state of Ohio who, from 2008 through the present, obtained what
are known as payday loans that violate state law.
Payday loans are short-term, high interest, unsecured loans
provided by the Defendants.
Advance America Small Loans of Ohio, Inc., is a Delaware
corporation licensed to do business in Ohio. Advance America does
business under these fictitious business names: Advance America
Cash Advance Centers, Advance America Cash Advance, and Advance
America.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jack D'Aurora, Esq.
John M. Gonzales, Esq.
Gil Gradisar, Esq.
THE BEHAL LAW GROUP LLC
501 S. High Street
Columbus, OH 43215
Telephone: (614) 643-5050
E-mail: jdaurora@behallaw.com
jgonzales@behallaw.com
ggradisar@behallaw.com
- and -
Gilbert Joseph Gradisar, Esq.
ZAINO AND HUMPHREY, LPA
5775 Perimeter Drive, Suite 275
Dublin, OH 43017
Telephone: (614) 799-2800
Facsimile: (614) 799-1500
E-mail: ggradisar@behallaw.com
AMERICAN FAMILY: Removed "Doss" Insurance Suit to W.D. Arkansas
---------------------------------------------------------------
The purported class action lawsuit captioned Doss, et al. v.
American Family Home Insurance Company, Case No. 46CV-13-286-1,
was removed from the Miller County Circuit Court to the U. S.
District Court for the Western District of Arkansas (Texarkana).
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:14-cv-04007-SOH to
the proceeding.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
D. Matt Keil, Esq.
John C. Goodson, Esq.
KEIL & GOODSON, P.A.
406 Walnut Street
Texarkana, AR 71854
Telephone: (870) 772-4113
Facsimile: (870) 773-2967
E-mail: mkeil@kglawfirm.com
jcgoodson@kglawfirm.com
- and -
Jason Earnest Roselius, Esq.
THE ROSELIUS LAW FIRM
13190 N. MacArthur Blvd.
Oklahoma City, OK 73142
Telephone: (405) 603-2222
Facsimile: (405) 603-2250
E-mail: roselius@roseliuslaw.com
- and -
W.H. Taylor, Esq.
Stevan Earl Vowell, Esq.
Timothy J. Myers, Esq.
William B. Putman, Esq.
TAYLOR LAW FIRM
303 East Millsap Road
P.O. Box 8310
Fayetteville, AR 72703
Telephone: (479) 443-5222
Facsimile: (479) 443-7842
E-mail: whtaylor@taylorlawpartners.com
svowell@taylorlawpartners.com
tmyers@taylorlawpartners.com
wbputman@taylorlawpartners.com
- and -
Stephen C. Engstrom, Esq.
WILSON, ENGSTROM, CORUM & COULTER
200 South Commerce, Suite 600
P.O. Box 71
Little Rock, AR 72203
Telephone: (501) 375-6453
E-mail: stephen@wecc-law.com
American Family Home Insurance Company is represented by:
W. Kelvin Wyrick, Sr., Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF W KELVIN WYRICK
610 Laurel Street
Texarkana, AR 71854
Telephone: (870) 774-7525
Facsimile: (870) 772-1569
E-mail: wyricklaw@cableone.net
APPLE INC: To Settle FTC Charges Over Mobile Apps for $32.5MM
-------------------------------------------------------------
According to an article posted by Jenna Greene at The Blog of
Legal Times, Apple Inc. will pay at least $32.5 million in
consumer refunds to settle Federal Trade Commission allegations
that it wrongly billed parents millions of dollars for
unauthorized charges incurred by their children in kids' mobile
apps.
The company, which settled a private class action over the same
conduct in October, likened the settlement to "double jeopardy,"
as Apple CEO Tim Cook put it in a letter to employees, and FTC
Commissioner Joshua Wright dissented from the deal, arguing the
FTC did not meet its burden of proof.
The FTC in an administrative complaint alleged Apple failed to
tell parents that when they entered their passwords to authorize
purchases of virtual items or currency in an app, their kids could
continue to make unlimited additional app purchases for the next
15 minutes. According to the FTC, thousands of kids did so,
racking up millions in charges on apps such as Dragon Story and
Tiny Zoo Friends. The agency charged Apple with violating Section
5 of the FTC Act, which bans unfair acts or practices. In
addition to refunding a minimum of $32.5 million to consumers (if
the claims are less, the FTC will keep the difference) Apple will
change its billing practices to ensure it obtains consumers'
express, informed consent prior to billing them.
"This settlement is a victory for consumers harmed by Apple's
unfair billing and a signal to the business community: whether
you're doing business in the mobile arena or the mall down the
street, fundamental consumer protections apply," FTC Chairwoman
Edith Ramirez said in a news release. "You cannot charge
consumers for purchases they did not authorize."
The FTC's allegations are not new. In 2011, Apple was hit with a
private class action filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California over unauthorized app purchases by kids.
U.S. District Judge Edward Davila in October approved a settlement
that calls for class members to get a full refund of charges --
either in cash or as an iTunes Stores credit. The deal also
includes $1.3 million in attorney fees to plaintiffs counsel from
firms including Saltz Mongeluzzi Barrett & Bendesky, Boni & Zack,
Seeger Weiss, and Berman Devalerio.
Ms. Ramirez in a press conference defended the FTC's settlement as
"much more robust" than the class action resolution, which she
said did not require Apple to change its billing practices.
Mr. Cook, the Apple chief executive, didn't see much distinction.
"It doesn't feel right for the FTC to sue over a case that had
already been settled," Mr. Cook wrote in the Jan. 15 letter. "To
us, it smacked of double jeopardy. However, the consent decree the
FTC proposed does not require us to do anything we weren't already
going to do, so we decided to accept it rather than take on a long
and distracting legal fight."
Apple was represented in the FTC matter by Gibson Dunn & Crutcher
partner M. Sean Royall -- sroyall@gibsondunn.com -- who was deputy
director of the FTC's Bureau of Competition from 2001 to 2003.
FTC Commissioner Joshua Wright, a Republican, penned a 17-page
dissent to the settlement. "I believe the Commission should have
conducted a much more robust analysis to determine whether the
injury to this small group of consumers justifies the finding of
unfairness and the imposition of a remedy," he wrote. "I do not
believe the Commission has met its burden to satisfy all three
requirements in the unfairness analysis. In particular, although
Apple's allegedly unfair act or practice has harmed some
consumers, I do not believe the Commission has demonstrated the
injury is substantial."
APPLE INC: Tech Firms May Face $9+ Bil. in Damages
--------------------------------------------------
Zach Miners, writing for PCWorld, reports that a U.S. appeals
court has cleared the way for thousands of Silicon Valley workers
to proceed as a group with a lawsuit alleging that technology
companies including Google and Apple colluded to drive down
employee compensation.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit on Jan. 14 denied a
petition from the technology companies seeking to appeal a
previous ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh that gives
the case class-action status. If the case proceeds to trial, now
set for May 27, and the companies lose, they could be ordered to
pay more than $9 billion in damages to cover lost wages to about
60,000 employees represented in the lawsuit who contend that the
companies forged illegal agreements to not hire each other's
workers, in violation of federal antitrust laws.
The case pits a number of Silicon Valley software engineers
against their employers, over what the employees say amounted to
"anti-poaching" agreements that drove down their compensation and
promoted unfair competition.
The case dates back to 2011 when five engineers alleged that Adobe
Systems, Apple, Google, Intel, Intuit, Lucasfilm and Pixar engaged
in an "overarching conspiracy" to fix and suppress employee
compensation and to restrict their mobility. Lucasfilm, Pixar and
Intuit have since settled with the plaintiffs.
A major component of the case is the companies' alleged use of "Do
Not Call" lists, which plaintiffs say put the firms' employees off
limits to the other companies, with instructions to recruiters not
to call the engineers about possible jobs.
The alleged agreement not to solicit each other's employees is in
violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act and the Clayton Antitrust
Act, the plaintiffs contend.
Emails sent between former Apple CEO Steve Jobs and then-Google
CEO Eric Schmidt concerning the alleged collusion make up some of
the evidence in the case, and those exchanges were cited by
Judge Koh in her ruling granting the case class-action status.
"We have a voluminous record of evidence supporting the claims,"
said Kelly Dermody, an attorney at Lieff Cabraser Heimann &
Bernstein representing the plaintiffs. She added that she felt
confident about taking the case to trial.
Last April, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California declined to certify the lawsuit as class action, but in
October Judge Koh granted that status.
"At trial, the court predicts that this evidence is likely to be
among the most persuasive to a jury as it illustrates and confirms
many of the actual dynamics at play within defendants' firms," she
said in the ruling.
The technology companies sought to appeal that decision, but the
Jan. 14 ruling from the appeals court lets stand Judge Koh's
October order.
Neither Google, Apple, Adobe, nor Intel could be reached for
comment.
AUSTRALIA: Class Action to Challenge Worker Underpayment Scheme
---------------------------------------------------------------
Clay Lucas, writing for The Age, reports that lawyers acting for
thousands of underpaid intellectually disabled workers were set to
lodge a court application on Jan. 20 seeking to block the federal
government's scheme to tackle the underpayments.
Legal firm Maurice Blackburn was set to file a Federal Court
action in an attempt to stop 10,000 intellectually disabled
employees at sheltered workshops signing away their legal rights
to sue the government for back pay. Some employees in the case
are paid less than $1 an hour.
The government said it would make a one-off payment, in July, to
the underpaid employees. The amount to be paid was not specified,
but those who agreed to receive the payment would waive their
rights to sue for potentially a much larger amount.
The payment promise followed a court decision in 2012 that found
people who worked at sheltered workshops had been underpaid for
several years, in breach of the Disability Discrimination Act.
The government's proposal to set up the new fund came just weeks
after a class action was lodged by Maurice Blackburn in December,
seeking to recover underpayments.
Maurice Blackburn industrial relations head Josh Bornstein said
the government's plan was immoral because it attacked a highly
vulnerable group of workers.
Under laws governing the workshops, many disabled staff are
legally paid between $1 and $2 an hour, despite the supposed
minimum wage being $16.37 an hour. The application to the Federal
Court was set to demand that all communication between the
government and disabled workers involved in the class action be
supervised by the court.
There are more than 300 Australian Disability Enterprises
employing about 20,000 disabled people in various workplaces.
CESS LLC: Fails to Pay OT and Minimum Wages, "Bravo" Suit Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
Rosa Ines Alvarez Bravo and all others similarly situated under 29
U.S.C. 216(B) v. Cess, LLC d/b/a Cafe Bastille, and Christian
Jouault, Case No. 1:14-cv-20052-KMW (S.D. Fla., January 6, 2014)
arises under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Ms. Bravo alleges that she and similarly situated employees have
not been paid overtime and minimum wages for work performed in
excess of 40 hours weekly.
Cess LLC, doing business as Cafe Bastille, is a corporation that
regularly transacts business within Dade County. Christian
Jouault is a corporate officer, owner or manager of the Company.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jamie H. Zidell, Esq.
J.H. ZIDELL, P.A.
300 71st Street, Suite 605
Miami Beach, FL 33141
Telephone: (305) 865-6766
Facsimile: (305) 865-7167
E-mail: ZABOGADO@AOL.COM
CITADEL PLAZA: Asbestos Cleanup to Start at Development Site
------------------------------------------------------------
Lynn Horsley, writing for The Kansas City Star, reports that
the long-awaited cleanup of the failed Citadel Plaza development
site near 63rd Street and Prospect Avenue is finally set to begin,
at least in a small way.
Kansas City officials said test pit activity was set to begin
Jan. 22 and continue for two to three weeks. It will take place
on four to six lots out of the 68 vacant lots identified for
possible buried asbestos. If contamination is found, it will be
properly disposed of, they said.
Results of those tests will set the stage for a full environmental
cleanup on the site later this year, said Andrew Bracker, the
city's brownfields coordinator. A brownfield is an area
contaminated by industrial or commercial use.
"It is the start," Mr. Bracker said of the process to address any
buried asbestos at the former development site -- encompassing
seven blocks -- so the city can try to market the location for
another developer.
Citadel Plaza was envisioned as an $80 million, 35-acre shopping
center with a grocery store, restaurants, other retailers and
housing. But the developer, CDC-KC, failed to properly monitor
asbestos removal before some homes were torn down in 2006, and the
project collapsed in a mess of environmental and financial
conflicts.
In November 2011, the Kansas City Council approved a $15 million
settlement to resolve lawsuits involving the development's
creditors. That settlement, made final in January 2012, gave the
city clear title to the land and freed the site for development.
But first the city has to make sure there is no more asbestos
contamination, and that process has taken much longer than
expected.
Consultants have taken samples from 154 properties and found only
one parcel with detectible asbestos fibers in the soil surface.
Subsoil contamination has been harder to determine.
Mr. Bracker said considerable research on more than 200 lots ruled
out contamination on all but 68 vacant lots. The city had hoped
to issue a cleanup contract in 2013, but that level of continuing
uncertainty about the 68 lots could lead to expensive bids,
Mr. Bracker said. So the city decided to proceed more slowly and
do the test pits. Even getting that contract in place took longer
than expected.
"We have not met our expectations with respect to the pace" of
cleanup, Mr. Bracker acknowledged.
The city has a $500,000 federal grant for cleanup and some
bond funds available, but Mr. Bracker said the city wants to
conserve as much money as possible for work needed before
development begins.
The test pits are in the 6100 blocks of Park Avenue and Olive
Street. Mr. Bracker said the contractor will monitor air quality
before and during the activity and will take necessary precautions
to make sure no asbestos escapes into the air. Nearby residents
will not be at risk and will have access to their homes.
Mr. Bracker said it should take 45 days to get and interpret the
test pit results, and that will pave the way for a more complete
cleanup, which he hopes can occur by this summer.
The city also commissioned a market study about potential
development opportunities for the site, but the report released in
May 2013 wasn't overly encouraging. It saw no potential for a
convenience/neighborhood-oriented shopping center, noting there
are other struggling shopping complexes nearby.
The consultant's report recommended trying to attract four or five
regional traffic generators such as a Menards, Ross Dress for
Less, Target and Michaels. City officials have said they intend
to market the site aggressively, but that won't until the cleanup
is complete.
CLAYTON WILLIAMS: Awaits Finality of Accord in Suit Over Lease
--------------------------------------------------------------
Clayton Williams Energy, Inc. is awaiting finalization by the
Union County, Arkansas court of a settlement reached in a suit
where the plaintiffs are suing for the costs of remediation to a
lease, according to the company's Nov. 5, 2013, Form 10-Q filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter
ended Sept. 30, 2013.
Southwest Royalties, Inc. is a defendant in a suit in Union
County, Arkansas where the plaintiffs are suing for the costs of
remediation to a lease on which operations were commenced in the
1930's. The plaintiffs are seeking in excess of $8 million. In
June 2013, the plaintiffs, SWR and the remaining defendants agreed
to a settlement of $750,000, of which SWR would pay $710,000. To
accomplish the settlement, the case would be converted to a class
action, and each member of the class would be offered the right to
either participate or opt out of the class and continue a separate
action for damages. If more than 25% of the plaintiffs opt out of
the settlement, SWR will have the right to terminate the
settlement. Any plaintiffs opting out would be subject to all
previous rulings of the court, including an order dismissing a
significant number of plaintiffs' claims on the basis that such
claims were time barred. SWR believes that the judge will approve
the settlement and the number of plaintiffs opting out of the
settlement, if any, will be insignificant. The company recorded a
loss on settlement of $710,000 for the nine months ended September
30, 2013 in connection with this proposed settlement. The company
is now awaiting finalization of the settlement by the court.
COLLECTO INC: Faces Suit Alleging Debt Collection Act Violations
----------------------------------------------------------------
Refael Sacher, on behalf of himself and all other similarly
situated consumers v. Collecto, Inc., d/b/a EOS CCA, Case No.
1:14-cv-00083-DLI-JO (E.D.N.Y., January 6, 2014) alleges
violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Adam Jon Fishbein, Esq.
ADAM J. FISHBEIN, ATTORNEY AT LAW
483 Chestnut Street
Cedarhurst, NY 11516
Telephone: (516) 791-4400
Facsimile: (516) 791-4411
E-mail: fishbeinadamj@gmail.com
COOPER TIRE: Faces Securities Class Action in Delaware
------------------------------------------------------
Tire Review reports that a securities class action lawsuit on
behalf of investors in Cooper Tire & Rubber Co. against the
tiremaker and certain of its senior executives has been filed in
the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware.
The complaint alleges that Cooper violated the federal securities
laws by issuing a series of materially misleading statements and
omissions in connection with the proposed acquisition of the
company by Apollo announced on June 12, 2013. In addition, the
complaint alleges that Cooper misrepresented Cooper's financial
condition, financial prospects, and the effectiveness of the
Company's internal controls.
Additionally, the complaint alleges that the company's CEO
Roy Armes and its chief financial officer Bradley Hughes violated
Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act.
A copy of the complaint is available at http://is.gd/tvcPlL
COVERAGE ONE: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime Premium, Suit Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
Laura Hannan, on behalf of herself and those similarly situated v.
Coverage One Insurance Group, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability
Company, Case No. 0:14-cv-60026-PAS (S.D. Fla., January 6, 2014)
is brought against the Defendant on behalf of the Plaintiff and
those who worked in excess of 40 hours in one or more work weeks
but did not receive pay at one and one-half times their regular
rate for their hours worked in excess of 40 hours.
Coverage One Insurance Group, LLC is a Florida Limited Liability
Company headquartered in Broward County, Florida.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Celler, Esq.
RICHARD CELLER LEGAL, P.A.
7450 Griffin Road, Suite 230
Davie, FL 33314
Telephone: (954) 318-0268
E-mail: richard@floridaovertimelawyer.com
CREDIT CONTROL: Faces "Davis" Suit Over FDCPA Violations in N.Y.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Shani R. Davis, on behalf of herself and all other similarly
situated consumers v. Credit Control Services, Inc., d/b/a Credit
Collection Services, Case No. 1:14-cv-00086-MKB-VVP (E.D.N.Y.
January 6, 2014) alleges violations of the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Adam Jon Fishbein, Esq.
ADAM J. FISHBEIN, ATTORNEY AT LAW
483 Chestnut Street
Cedarhurst, NY 11516
Telephone: (516) 791-4400
Facsimile: (516) 791-4411
E-mail: fishbeinadamj@gmail.com
CRESTPARK DEWITT: "Moss" FLSA Suit Won't Proceed as Class Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Susan Webber Wright denied a motion for class
certification in the case captioned JEANNIE MOSS, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs, v. CRESTPARK DEWITT, LLC, ET AL., Defendants, NO.
2:12CV00204 SWW, (E.D. Ark.).
Plaintiffs Jeannie Moss and Dominique Smith worked as certified
nursing assistants at defendants' nursing homes in Dewitt,
Arkansas, and Helena, Arkansas, respectively. They sought to
bring a class action complaint on behalf of all hourly employees
at defendants' four nursing homes in Arkansas for pay they did not
receive when they worked through their lunch breaks. Plaintiffs
assert Defendants violated the Fair Labor Standards Act and the
Arkansas Minimum Wage Act. They also brought claims for unjust
enrichment and promissory estoppel.
Judge Wright denied without prejudice plaintiffs' motion for
conditional certification of their FLSA claim as a collective
action. The Court held that the Plaintiffs failed to show that
there are common questions that could be resolved on a classwide
basis using common proof.
A copy of the District Court's January 14, 2014 Opinion and Order
is available at http://is.gd/vfpY4gfrom Leagle.com.
CYPRESS CREEK: Faces Class Action Over Alleged Fraud
----------------------------------------------------
A class-action lawsuit has been filed against the owner of a
company that was the subject of a WAFF 48 News investigation.
On Jan. 21, affiliate farmers filed a class-action lawsuit against
Jamie Lawhorne and Cypress Creek Organic Farms. The lawsuit filed
in Cullman County accused Mr. Lawhorne and Cypress Creek Organic
Farms of breach of contract, fraud, deceit and fraudulent deceit.
WAFF's investigation began in August when the Better Business
Bureau issued an alert on Cypress Creek Organic Farms. Affiliates
told WAFF they paid more than $9,000 in exchange for a full-
service greenhouse and greenhouse maintenance, organic fertilizers
and organic seedlings.
According to their contracts they got 85% royalties, daily pick-up
of harvested tomatoes and guaranteed buyback of produce. The BBB
said then-CEO Lawhorne could not back up claims affiliates could
earn $25-40,000 a year.
DEPUY ORTHOPAEDICS: "Bozarth" Suit Moved to ASR Hip Implant MDL
---------------------------------------------------------------
The lawsuit captioned Bozarth, et al. v. DePuy Orthopaedics Inc.,
et al., Case No. 3:13-cv-00266, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas to the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Ohio (Cleveland) to be
included in MDL No. 2197, In Re Depuy Orthopaedics, Inc., ASR Hip
Implant Products Liability Litigation. The Ohio District Court
Clerk assigned Case No. 1:13-dp-21572-DAK to the proceeding.
The lawsuit arises from DePuy's ASRXL Acetabular System, a
prosthetic orthopedic device used in patients in need of a hip
replacement. The complaint alleges that shortly after the
Defendants launched the DePuy ASR line of artificial hip products,
they began to receive reports of failures, including acetabular
loosening. The alleged failure had forced patients to undergo
painful and risky surgeries to remove and replace the failed hip
component.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Phillip J. Wells, Esq.
Robert Wells, Esq.
MCDANIEL & WELLS
400 South Main Street
Jonesboro, AR 72401
Telephone: (800) 954-5950
Facsimile: (870) 932-0919
E-mail: pjwells@mcdanielandwells.com
rwells@mcdanielandwells.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Lyn Peeples Pruitt, Esq.
Adria W. Conklin, Esq.
MITCHELL, WILLIAMS, SELIG, GATES & WOODYARD, P.L.L.C.
425 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 1800
Little Rock, AR 72201
Telephone: (501) 688-8869
Facsimile: (501) 918-7869
E-mail: lpruitt@mwlaw.com
aconklin@mwlaw.com
DESIGNED RECEIVABLE: Faces "Lowenbein" Class Suit in New York
-------------------------------------------------------------
Menachem Mendel Lowenbein, on behalf of himself and all other
similarly situated consumers v. Designed Receivable Solutions,
Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-00087-FB-MDG (E.D.N.Y., January 6, 2014)
alleges violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Adam Jon Fishbein, Esq.
ADAM J. FISHBEIN, ATTORNEY AT LAW
483 Chestnut Street
Cedarhurst, NY 11516
Telephone: (516) 791-4400
Facsimile: (516) 791-4411
E-mail: fishbeinadamj@gmail.com
EQUITY LIFESTYLE: Court Approves Accord in Suit Over Rent Rules
---------------------------------------------------------------
The California Superior Court approved a settlement entered in a
suit by the Tenant Association against Equity Lifestyle
Properties, Inc. over rent control ordinances, according to the
company's Nov. 5, 2013, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2013.
In June 2003, the company won a judgment against the City of
Santee in California Superior Court (Case No. 777094). The effect
of the judgment was to invalidate, on state law grounds, two rent
control ordinances the City of Santee had enforced against the
company and other property owners. However, the Court allowed the
City to continue to enforce a rent control ordinance that predated
the two invalid ordinances (the "Prior Ordinance"). As a result of
the judgment the company was entitled to collect a one-time rent
increase based upon the difference in annual adjustments between
the invalid ordinance(s) and the Prior Ordinance and to adjust the
company's base rents to reflect what the company could have
charged had the Prior Ordinance been continually in effect. The
City of Santee appealed the judgment. The City and the Homeowners'
Association of Meadowbrook Estates ("Tenant Association") also
each sued the company in separate actions in the California
Superior Court (Case Nos. GIE 020887 and GIE 020524) alleging that
the rent adjustments pursuant to the judgment violated the Prior
Ordinance, sought to rescind the rent adjustments, and sought
refunds of amounts paid, and penalties and damages in these
separate actions. As a result of further proceedings and a series
of appeals and remands, the company was required to and did
release the additional rents to the Tenant Association's counsel
for disbursement to the tenants, and the company has ceased
collecting the disputed rent amounts.
The Tenant Association continued to seek damages, penalties and
fees in their separate action based on the same claims the City
made on the tenants' behalf in the City's case. The company moved
for judgment on the pleadings in the Tenant Association's case on
the ground that the Tenant Association's case was moot in light of
the result in the City's case. On November 6, 2008, the Court
granted the company motion for judgment on the pleadings without
leave to amend. The Tenant Association appealed. In June 2010, the
Court of Appeal remanded the case for further proceedings. On
remand, on December 12, 2011, the Court granted the company motion
for summary judgment and denied the Tenant Association's motion
for summary judgment.
On January 9, 2012, the Court entered judgment in the company's
favor, specifying that the Tenant Association shall recover
nothing. On January 26, 2012, the Court set March 30, 2012 as the
date for hearing the company's motion for attorneys' fees and the
Tenant Associations' motion to reduce the company's claim for
costs. On March 26, 2012, the Tenant Association filed a notice of
appeal. On August 16, 2012, the company and the Tenant Association
entered a settlement agreement pursuant to which the Tenant
Association dismissed its appeal in exchange for the company's
agreement to dismiss the company's claims for attorneys' fees and
other costs. Because the matter was a class action by the Tenant
Association, on January 18, 2013 the Court held a fairness hearing
to consider final approval of the settlement, and approved the
settlement.
EQUITY LIFESTYLE: Thousand Trails "Members" Settle Claims
---------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs who are purported members of Equity Lifestyle
Properties, Inc.'s Thousand Trails network of campgrounds withdrew
their petition for leave to appeal an order denying class
certification to their suit and the parties have agreed to a
confidential settlement of the individual claims, according to the
company's Nov. 5, 2013, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2013.
On July 29, 2011, the company was served with a class action
lawsuit in California state court filed by two named plaintiffs,
who are husband and wife. Among other allegations, the suit
alleges that the plaintiffs purchased a membership in the
company's Thousand Trails network of campgrounds and paid annual
dues; that they were unable to make a reservation to utilize one
of the campgrounds because, they were told, their membership did
not permit them to utilize that particular campground; that the
company failed to comply with the written disclosure requirements
of various states' membership camping statutes; that the company
misrepresented that the company provide a money-back guaranty; and
that the company misrepresented that the campgrounds or portions
of the campgrounds would be limited to use by members.
Allegedly on behalf of "between 100,000 and 200,000" putative
class members, the suit asserts claims for alleged violation of:
(1) the California Civil Code 1812.300, et seq.; (2) the Arizona
Revised Statutes 32-2198, et seq.; (3) Chapter 222 of the Texas
Property Code; (4) Florida Code 509.001, et seq.; (5) Chapter
119B of the Nevada Administrative Code; (6) Business & Professions
Code 17200, et seq., (7) Business & Professions Code 17500; (8)
Fraud - Intentional Misrepresentation and False Promise; (9) Fraud
- Omission; (10) Negligent Misrepresentation; and (11) Unjust
Enrichment.
The complaint seeks, among other relief, rescission of the
membership agreements and refund of the member dues of plaintiffs
and all others who purchased a membership from or paid membership
dues to the company since July 21, 2007; general and special
compensatory damages; reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and
expenses of suit; punitive and exemplary damages; a permanent
injunction against the complained of conduct; and pre-judgment
interest.
On August 19, 2011, the company filed an answer generally denying
the allegations of the complaint, and asserting affirmative
defenses. On August 23, 2011, the company removed the case from
the California state court to the federal district court in San
Jose. On July 23, 2012, the company filed a motion to deny class
certification. On July 24, 2012, the plaintiffs filed a motion for
leave to amend their class action complaint to add four additional
named plaintiffs. On August 28, 2012, the Court held a hearing on
the company's motion to deny class certification and on the
plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend. Separately, on September
14, 2012, the plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification,
on which the Court held a hearing on November 6, 2012.
On March 18, 2013, the Court entered an order denying class
certification and denying the plaintiffs' motion for leave to
amend their class action complaint. The individual claims of the
two named plaintiffs remain pending. On April 1, 2013, the
plaintiffs filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit a petition for leave to appeal from the order
denying class certification. On May 15, 2013, the plaintiffs
withdrew their petition for leave to appeal. The parties have
agreed to a confidential settlement of the individual claims of
the two named plaintiffs.
EXPERIAN INFORMATION: Violates Rights Under FCRA, Suit Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
Robert N. Broberg Jr., on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. and
Ark-La-Tex Financial Services, LLC, 0:14-cv-00049-MJD-JJG (D.
Minn., January 6, 2014) is a private attorney general consumer
class action arising under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The
Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants transact business in
Minnesota and make money buying and selling consumer data about
Minnesotans in a manner that violates Minnesotans' rights under
the FCRA.
Experian Information Solutions, Inc. is an Ohio business
corporation headquartered in California. Ark-La-Tex Financial
Services, LLC is a Texas limited liability company.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Thomas J. Lyons, Jr., Esq.
367 Commerce Court
Vadnais Heights, MN 55127
Telephone: (651) 770-9707
Facsimile: (651) 704-0907
E-mail: tommycjc@aol.com
- and -
Brandon T. McDonough, Esq.
Nicholas R. Nowicki, Esq.
3011 36th Avenue South, Suite 6
Minneapolis, MN 55406
Telephone: 612-217-0257
Facsimile: 612-345-7016
E-mail: brandon@mcnowick.com
nik@mcnowick.com
FACEBOOK INC: Ninth Circuit May Look Into User ID Claims
--------------------------------------------------------
Scott Graham, writing for The Recorder, reports that two privacy
class actions with the potential for millions in statutory damages
against Facebook and Zynga sounded destined to fail on Jan. 17 at
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
But Facebook may not be completely off the hook, because a three-
judge panel sounded willing to entertain breach-of-contract and
other state law claims against the social network for revealing
user IDs to third parties.
Facebook attorney Aaron Panner -- apanner@khhte.com -- of Kellogg,
Huber, Hansen, Todd, Evans & Figel argued that disclosure of mere
ID numbers didn't cause any appreciable damage under California
law, but Judge Richard Tallman didn't sound convinced.
"We're here on basically a pleadings appeal," he said, "so we
don't have any discovery about how valuable is this information."
The Ninth Circuit may have to certify the state law issues to the
California Supreme Court, he added.
How much those claims would be worth is unclear, though plaintiff
attorney Kassra Nassiri argued the user IDs lead to "a goldmine of
information" on which Facebook's entire business model is
predicated.
Robertson v. Facebook, 12-15619, and Graf v. Zynga, 11-18044 were
filed in 2010 shortly after The Wall Street Journal revealed that
Facebook user IDs were being transferred to advertisers via HTTP
referers when users clicked on advertisements appearing on
Facebook or apps like Zynga. U.S. District Judge James Ware of the
Northern District of California dismissed both cases in 2011.
The Ninth Circuit panel, comprised of Tallman, Sandra Ikuta and
Arthur Alarcon, consolidated arguments in the two cases. Tallman
and Ikuta are known as two of the court's more conservative
judges.
The case against Facebook is fairly straightforward. Mr. Nassiri
argues the company promised users that it would protect their
personal information and share only "non-personally identifiable
attributes" with advertisers. Facebook broke that promise and
violated state and federal laws including the Wiretap Act and the
Stored Communications Act in the process, he says. Those laws
impose penalties of hundreds or even thousands of dollars per
violation.
The case against Zynga is more complicated, as it involves users
clicking on third-party ads in a Zynga frame running on the
Facebook platform. Plaintiff attorney Adam Levitt spent much of
his argument on Jan. 17 answering questions from Judge Sandra
Ikuta about what exactly he was alleging.
"I promise you, I really worked hard on this case, and I struggled
a bit" to understand it, said Ikuta, who acknowledged that
She -- like many judges -- is not a Facebook user.
Judge Tallman, a tech-savvy jurist who brings his laptop to every
argument, seemed equally perplexed. "What's the beef here?" he
asked. "Who's being misled?"
Mr. Levitt argued that "the sanctity of electronic communications"
are at stake, drawing a parallel to the problems confronting the
National Security Agency.
Zynga's attorney, Richard Seabolt -- RLSeabolt@duanemorris.com --
of Duane Morris, replied that Facebook IDs are public information,
discoverable via a simple Google search. The reason the claims
are hard to understand, he argued, is that they don't fit the
statutes.
Mr. Levitt's appeal is limited to federal claims. Mr. Nassiri,
the lead attorney against Facebook, emphasized that he's bringing
contract and California statutory claims as well.
That seemed like his only hope on Jan. 17, as Judge Tallman said
Ninth Circuit case law has consistently held that disclosing mere
phone numbers or similar metadata doesn't violate federal
wiretapping laws.
"Those are Fourth Amendment cases," Mr. Nassiri argued, "so
they're not directly on point."
"Well they are with regard to what constitutes contents," Judge
Tallman replied.
But Judge Tallman also pushed back on Facebook counsel Panner when
Mr. Panner said Congress never intended to bring simple
identifiers under the ambit of those laws.
"I don't think Congress thought in its wildest dreams," Judge
Tallman said, "about what your client is doing now."
FIRST CONCEPT: Fails to Properly Pay Overtime Wages, Suit Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cristian Rojas on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. First Concept Wireless, Inc., Emanuel Vital-Herne and
Katia Vital-Herne, individually, Case No. 1:14-cv-20041-MGC (S.D.
Fla., January 6, 2014) alleges that the Defendants violated the
overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act in that they
required the Plaintiff and others, who are similarly situated to
her, to work more than 40 hours in a work week but failed to
compensate them for those hours at the rate of time and a half
their regular rate of pay.
First Concept Wireless, Inc. is a Florida corporation
headquartered in Miami-Dade County, Florida. The Individual
Defendants own or manage First Concept. The Defendants employed
two or more employees, who regularly sold, handled, or otherwise
worked on, sold or used goods and materials that had moved in or
had been produced for interstate commerce, to wit: cell phones and
cell phone parts and accessories, and cellular services.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Leslie W. Langbein, Esq.
LANGBEIN & LANGBEIN, P.A.
8181 NW 154th Street, Suite 105
Miami Lakes, FL 33016
Telephone: (305) 556-3663
Facsimile: (305) 556-3647
E-mail: langbeinpa@bellsouth.net
FORD MOTOR: Redoubles Effort to Prevent Vehicle Quality Woes
------------------------------------------------------------
Reuters reports that Ford Motor Co is betting that the tight bond
between two of its senior executives can help the automaker
prevent quality missteps from derailing its busiest-ever year for
launching new vehicles.
Joe Hinrichs, head of North and South American operations, and
Raj Nair, Ford's global product development chief, are two of the
key players in what has been an all-out push to stamp out problems
that have dogged the automaker in the last few years.
At stake are Ford's credibility and profitability as it embarks on
an ambitious plan to introduce 23 new vehicles -- the most in one
year in company history -- around the world this year.
These include a radical revamp of its most profitable vehicle, the
top-selling F-150 pickup truck, which was unveiled at the Detroit
auto show last week. The new version uses less steel and more
aluminum.
"We have a lot more new product and a lot more new launches than
we used to have," Mr. Hinrichs said in interview on the sidelines
of the auto show. "We know how important these launches are."
In the last few years, Ford has tumbled in key reliability surveys
due to problems with its touch-screen dashboard system and some of
its transmissions. It conducted seven recalls of its Escape
crossover since its mid-2012 launch, which may have led to
warranty costs of as much as $300 million in 2013.
As part of the redoubling of Ford's effort to prevent quality
woes, Mr. Hinrichs and Nair are drawing on their experience
working together in North America and Asia for the last dozen
years.
Both helped shape Ford's restructuring in North America in 2005
and 2006, when Chief Executive Alan Mulally came on board to steer
the automaker's turnaround. In late 2009, they went to Shanghai
and spent the better part of a year away from their families to
replicate Mr. Mulally's "One Ford" plan -- which unified formerly
disconnected business units to gain economies of scale -- in Asia
and improve quality.
The two now conduct high-level reviews every month or so of all
major programs to pinpoint potential problems, a practice that
will continue throughout 2014.
Over the years, the two have developed an almost intuitive
understanding of the other's perspective, Messrs. Hinrichs and
Nair said in a joint interview late last year.
Their strong rapport allows them to divvy up duties and work more
effectively, they said. So when a scheduling conflict arises,
they are comfortable if one of them has to miss a launch review as
long as the other person is in the room.
"When we look at something, 99 times out of a 100, we're both
seeing the same thing," Mr. Nair said. "A lot of times, we both
don't have to be there because of that."
Then Mr. Hinrichs jumped in: "Which is important because there's
only so much time in the day."
Not Pointing Fingers
The Escape recalls have also been a black eye for Ford and account
for most of the $250 million to $300 million in warranty expenses
that Ford expects to pay for 2013.
These costs could pinch its 2013 operating margin in North
America, Ford said last month.
Ford's woes largely stem from the fact that it is launching more
new vehicles at a faster clip than in years past, in keeping with
a broader trend in the industry, analysts and executives said.
In some cases, that has led to unresolved glitches that make
features like the MyFord Touch entertainment and navigation system
tough to operate, according to Consumer Reports magazine and
consultant J.D. Power & Associates.
"Maybe Ford went too far, too early," Morgan Stanley analyst
Adam Jonas said. But "if you have a heart-to-heart with Ford
management about the issues, they don't give you excuses. They're
addressing it. They are not pointing fingers."
The faster pace evokes a broader trend. Since the 2009 economic
downturn, major automakers have been launching new models with
fewer factories and a smaller supply base, elevating the risk of
quality problems in the future.
In the 1990s, the average automaker's lineup was between four and
five years old in North America, Citi analysts said last month in
a research note. That will shorten to between two and three years
over the next couple years.
But as part of its effort, Ford is now spending more time
conducting research before green-lighting a vehicle design. This
has lengthened the time it takes Ford to develop a new product,
but should ensure the product is top-notch.
"We reached the point where we took more time out than we could
probably afford to, so we put time back in -- based on data, based
on learnings from the consumer," Mr. Hinrichs said.
Still A War
Analysts added that quality issues are not insurmountable,
pointing to Toyota Motor Corp's ability to bounce back from its
recent crisis involving sudden unintended acceleration in some
vehicles.
Despite the problems, Ford's U.S. market share actually grew
almost half a percentage point to 15.9 percent last year.
But the U.S. auto market is expected to be more competitive this
year as sales growth is expected to slow, analysts said.
If quality problems persist this year, it may raise questions
about Ford's ability to execute the F-150 launch, Guggenheim
Securities analyst Matthew Stover said.
Company executives are keenly aware of this risk and said that as
a result, quality has been a key focus for Ford over the past
year. These changes to Ford's quality process will continue
throughout 2014.
Ford engineers and designers are coordinating efforts earlier in
the product development process. They are using 3D technology and
other tools that allow Ford to spot and avoid problems from
showing up on the assembly line.
Each Wednesday, top executives pore over Ford's more than 60
global vehicle programs, focusing on the most troubled ones.
Such meetings bring problems to light more quickly and make "a big
organization small," said Chief Operating Officer Mark Fields, who
started the forum and who also leads it.
This year, Ford is launching revamped versions of the F-150 and
Mustang sports car, two models that have an outsized effect on
consumer perceptions of Ford worldwide.
The Mustang will be sold globally for the first time ever. The
F-150 is an even bigger challenge because it features an aluminum-
alloy body that has triggered changes to the way the trucks are
built, repaired and sold.
New model launches are something of a specialty for Messrs.
Hinrichs and Nair. When they met around 2002, Mr. Hinrichs was in
charge of material planning and logistics worldwide for Ford and
Mr. Nair led new model launches in North America.
"Because both of us have been through a lot of launches, we have
the emotional resilience that you need to have because every
launch is difficult," Mr. Hinrichs said.
"It's like asking, is the war going well?" Mr. Nair added. "It's
still a war."
FORD MOTOR: Recalls Edge Model Due to Possible Fuel Leakage
-----------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: January 2, 2014
Type of communication: Recall
Subcategory: Car, SUV
Notification type: Safety Mfr
System: Fuel Supply
Units affected: 3409
Source of recall: Transport Canada
Identification number: 2014001
TC ID number: 2014001
Manufacturer recall
number: 13S13
On certain vehicles equipped with a 2.0L engine, the fuel line
pulse damper may have been manufactured incorrectly and could
develop cracks. Fuel leakage, in the presence of an ignition
source, could result in a fire causing property damage and/or
personal injury.
Dealers will replace the fuel line assembly. Note: The recall
supersedes recall 2012-299 (12S40). Vehicles that were repaired
under the previous campaign will also need to be repaired under
this campaign.
Affected products: 2012 and 2013 Ford Edge models
FORD MOTOR: Recalls Explorer Model Due to Possible Defect
---------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: January 8, 2014
Type of communication: Recall
Subcategory: SUV
Notification type: Safety Mfr
System: Steering
Units affected: 20
Source of recall: Transport Canada
Identification number: 2014002
TC ID number: 2014002
Manufacturer recall
number: 13S14
A safety defect may exist in certain service parts installed after
September 1st, 2013. Replacement steering gear assemblies could
contain a defect potentially resulting in steering lockup and an
inability to steer the vehicle. This would increase the risk of a
crash causing injury and/or damage to property.
Owners of affected vehicles will be notified based on warranty and
dealer service records and affected parts will be replaced.
Affected products:
Maker Model Model year(s) affected
----- ----- ----------------------
FORD EXPLORER 2011, 2012
FOREST LABORATORIES: Judge Certifies Celexa, Lexapro Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------------
HarrisMartin reports that a Massachusetts federal judge has
certified a class action brought by two Missouri residents who
accuse the makers of Celexa and Lexapro of misrepresenting and
concealing information concerning the effectiveness of the drugs
for the treatment of depression in pediatric patients.
On Jan. 10, Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton of the U.S. District Court
for the District of Massachusetts found that the "informed choice"
allegations made by Ruth Dunham and Tanya Shippy is a "novel"
theory, but viable under the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act.
FOREST RIVER: Recalls 123 Trailers Due to Inadequate Clearance
--------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: January 9, 2014
Type of communication: Recall
Subcategory: Travel Trailer
Notification type: Safety Mfr
System: Suspension
Units affected: 123
Source of recall: Transport Canada
Identification number: 2014003
TC ID number: 2014003
On certain model travel trailers, the tires may have inadequate
clearance with the trailer floor and may be damaged when
travelling over large bumps or pot holes if the trailer is loaded
to the gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR). This could result in a
blow out which could lead to a crash, resulting in injury and/or
property damage.
Dealers will install a lift kit between the frame and the axle
mounting brackets to increase clearance between the tires and
floor.
Affected products:
Maker Model Model year(s) affected
----- ----- ----------------------
FOREST RIVER ROCKWOOD 2012, 2013, 2012, 2013, 2012, 2013
FOREST RIVER FLAGSTAFF 2012, 2013
GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls Sierra and Silverado Models
---------------------------------------------------
Starting date: December 20, 2013
Type of communication: Recall
Subcategory: Light Truck & Van
Notification type: Compliance Mfr
System: Powertrain
Units affected: 6
Source of recall: Transport Canada
Identification number: 2013456
TC ID number: 2013456
Manufacturer recall
number: 13442
On certain HD model trucks equipped with an Allison A1000
Transmission, the dash display may not indicate the selected gear
if the transmission shift lever is in the "1" position. If the
driver is not aware of the position of the shift lever and
attempts to accelerate only in first gear, it could increase the
possibility of a crash without prior warning, which could result
in properly damage and/or personal injury.
Dealers will reflash the transmission control module.
Affected products:
Maker Model Model year(s) affected
----- ----- ----------------------
GMC SIERRA 2014
CHEVROLET SILVERADO 2014
GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 370,000 Full-Size Trucks Over Fire Hazard
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul A. Eisenstein, writing for CNBC, reports that just days
before it learns whether its 2014 Chevrolet Silverado pickup wins
honors as the North American Truck of the Year, General Motors has
announced it is recalling 370,000 full-size trucks due to a
potential fire hazard.
The safety action covers both the new Chevy Silverado and the
near-twin GMC Sierra model, both receiving widespread kudos since
being completely redesigned for the 2014 model-year. But the
recall could be just one of the problems the new GM pickups will
be facing in the coming days.
According to GM, the recall is required to reprogram engine
control software to reduce the risk of overheating exhaust
components and eliminate the risk of an engine compartment fire.
The Detroit maker reports that there have been eight fires
resulting from the problem, "three of which were on customer owned
vehicles." It also noted that the incidents occurred in regions
with very cold weather. There have been no injuries resulting
from the fires, GM said.
Due to the size of the recall, many of the new models may not yet
be in customer hands but still in transit or on dealer lots. GM
is notifying dealers and owners to watch for a continuous yellow
"check engine light" warning on the instrument panel, as well as
an "engine power reduced" message on the vehicles' driver
information center. Customers are being urged to avoid leaving
their pickups idling while unattended.
The recall covers 303,000 trucks sold in the U.S. and another
67,000 sold in Canada and Mexico. It affects only 2014 Chevrolet
Silverado and GMC Sierra models equipped with 4.3-liter V-6 and
5.3-liter V-8 engines. Trucks with GM's 6.2-liter V-8 are not
affected.
This is the first major automotive recall of the New Year and
follows several years during which manufacturers came under
pressure to respond more quickly and more inclusively to potential
safety problems.
While industry analysts believe consumers have come to downplay
recalls as a regular part of vehicle ownership, the large service
action nonetheless comes as a setback for GM which has been hoping
to gain ground on its cross-town rival Ford Motor. The Silverado
was the nation's second best-selling vehicle last year, behind
only Ford's F-Series pickup, which finished 2013 as America's top
truck for the 27th consecutive year, and its best-selling vehicle
overall for 32 years straight.
GM is still hoping to gain some momentum on Monday when it learns
whether the Silverado was chosen as North American Truck of the
Year by a panel of 48 U.S. and Canadian journalists. The full-
size pickup is up against two utes, the Acura MDX and the Jeep
Cherokee.
But Ford hopes to steal any thunder, should the Silverado win,
with the unveiling of an all-new version of its F-150, the light-
duty version of its big pickup adopting a new "aluminum-intensive"
design that is expected to trim somewhere between 500 and 700
pounds of weight -- and, in the process, yield significant
improvements in fuel economy.
GM recently showed a prototype version of the Silverado that uses
aluminum and other weight-saving materials but it isn't expected
to make any such switch for a number of years.
GENPACT SERVICES: Sued for Violating Fair Debt Collection Act
-------------------------------------------------------------
Chana Goldberg, on behalf of herself and all other similarly
situated consumers v. Genpact Services, LLC, Case No. 1:14-cv-
00088-ILG-LB (E.D.N.Y., January 6, 2014) alleges violations of the
Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Adam Jon Fishbein, Esq.
ADAM J. FISHBEIN, ATTORNEY AT LAW
483 Chestnut Street
Cedarhurst, NY 11516
Telephone: (516) 791-4400
Facsimile: (516) 791-4411
E-mail: fishbeinadamj@gmail.com
GLADSTONE PORT: Judge Adjourns Application to Strike Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Rae Wilson, writing for CQ News, reports that a judge has
adjourned a Gladstone Port Corporation application to strike out a
class action involving 51 fishermen seeking compensation for
losing their fishing grounds.
Judge Michael Rackemann was set to hear the application on Jan. 20
and determine some preliminary matters ahead of a hearing in the
matter. But after the parties had some discussions, more
paperwork will change hands before a further application date on
April 15.
The case centers on the Coordinator-General's approval conditions
for the Western Basin dredging project, which demand the port
provide compensation for losing local fishing grounds.
The port has had a compensation process open for several months,
but Gladstone fisherman Trevor Falzon is challenging whether the
program has offered enough.
HARVEST MANAGEMENT: "Cwik" Suit Settlement Gets Final Approval
--------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Dolly M. Gee granted final approval of a settlement
in the case captioned SALLIE CWIK, individually and on behalf of
others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. HARVEST MANAGEMENT SUB
LLC and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, CASE NO. CV12-
8309 DMG (JCX), (C.D. Cal.).
In its judgment, the Court adopted all defined terms as set forth
in the parties' Stipulation Re: Settlement of Collective Action
filed in the case.
For purposes of effectuating the settlement, the Court certified a
collective action class of all Members of the Settlement Class, as
that term is defined in and by the terms of the Stipulation, and
the Court deems this definition sufficient for purposes of due
process and 29 U.S.C. Section 216(b).
Holiday has agreed to pay Class Counsel their reasonable attorney
fees in this matter in the total combined, gross amount of
$1,875,000 as well as allowable litigation costs and associated
litigation expenses in this matter up to the gross amount of
$25,000, and Holiday has agreed to pay an enhancement award in the
total amount of $5,000 to Plaintiff to reimburse her for her
unique services and execution of a general release. The Court
found that these agreements are fair and reasonable. Holiday was
directed to make such payments in accordance with the terms of the
Stipulation, as amended.
"This Litigation is hereby dismissed with prejudice," Judge Gee
concluded.
A copy of the District Court's January 13, 2014 Judgment is
available at http://is.gd/lPRhrcfrom Leagle.com.
HOMEWARD RESIDENTIAL: Loses Bid to Stay Discovery in Adams Case
---------------------------------------------------------------
Magistrate Judge Sonja F. Bivins granted a motion to compel
discovery in the purported class action captioned ANNIE B. ADAMS,
Plaintiff, v. HOMEWARD RESIDENTIAL, INC., Defendant, CIVIL ACTION
NO. 13-00329-WS-B, (S.D. Ala.).
The Plaintiff in the case alleged that the Defendant engaged in
deceptive collection activity by failing to comply with the
requirements of 15 U.S.C. Section 1692g. The action came before
the Court on the Defendant's Motion to Stay Discovery or
Alternatively, Motion for Bifurcation of Discovery and Entry of
Amended Scheduling Order, and the Plaintiff Annie Adams' Motion to
Compel Discovery.
Judge Bivins denied the Defendant's motion to stay saying the
Defendant filed the pending motion to dismiss at least three
months after the scheduling order had been entered and after
discovery was well underway. Given that the motion to dismiss is
based on information that was readily available to the Defendant,
it is not clear why the Defendant did not seek a stay on the front
end, but instead waited until the parties were fully engaged in
discovery to seek a stay, she said. What is clear, however, Judge
Bivins continued, is that halting discovery at this stage will
interfere with the scheduling order that is in place, and will
result in unnecessary delay if the motion to dismiss is denied.
The risk that the Defendant will be forced to engage in needless
discovery could have been addressed early on had the Defendant
acted promptly in filing its dispositive motion and request for a
stay. Accordingly, a stay of discovery at this juncture is not
appropriate, she concluded.
The Court likewise denied the Defendant's request for bifurcation
saying the Defendant is now estopped from arguing, during the
height of discovery, that discovery should be confined to the
claims of the named Plaintiff.
"To the extent Defendant has not done so, it is directed to
supplement its discovery responses by January 31, 2014," added
Judge Bivins.
A copy of the District Court's January 15, 2014 Order is available
at http://is.gd/iNNIhlfrom Leagle.com.
INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL: Sends Unauthorized Text Ads, Suit Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
William Telford, individually, and on behalf of all other
similarly situated persons v. Intellectual Capital Management,
Inc., d/b/a SMS Masterminds, a Nevada Corporation and Muscle Maker
Franchising, LLC, a New Jersey limited liability company, Case No.
2:14-cv-00064-JFB-AKT (E.D.N.Y., January 6, 2014) alleges that in
an attempt to market and promote its restaurants, Muscle Maker
employed Intellectual Capital to engage in an especially invasive
form of marketing -- the transmission of unauthorized
advertisements in the form of "text message" calls to the cellular
telephones of consumers throughout the nation, in violation of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
Intellectual Capital Management, Inc., d/b/a SMS Masterminds, is a
Nevada Corporation that operates a mobile marketing and messaging
service throughout the United States of America and the world.
Muscle Maker Franchising, LLC is a New Jersey limited liability
company that owns and operates a chain of fast-casual restaurants
across the country.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Erik Harald Langeland, Esq.
ERIK H. LANGELAND, P.C.
500 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1610
New York, NY 10110
Telephone: (212) 354-6270
Facsimile: (646) 607-1878
E-mail: elangeland@langelandlaw.com
ISERVE RESIDENTIAL: Accord in "Simmons" Suit Has Final Approval
---------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge James V. Selna entered judgment on January 14,
2014, in the case captioned VAN SIMMONS, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated and on behalf of the
general public; Plaintiffs, v. ISERVE RESIDENTIAL LENDING, LLC, an
Arizona limited liability company; NATIONAL ASSET DIRECT, a
Delaware corporation; GARY WILLIS; DOUGLAS WILSON; and DOES 1-100,
Defendants, CASE NO. 8:12-CV-00229-JVS-MLG, (C.D. Cal.).
In his ruling, Judge Selna held that:
1. The Class as to whom this judgment applies is defined as: All
individuals employed by Defendants as a Loan Originator, Loan
Officer, or equivalent position at iServe Residential Lending
LLC's Irvine branch ("CA17") at any time between January 10,
2008 through August 5, 2013.
2. No Persons requested to be excluded from the settlement.
3. The parties will comply with the terms and conditions of the
Settlement Agreement and of the Order Granting Final Approval.
Upon such compliance, and in accordance with the terms of the
Order Granting Final Approval, the matter and the Complaint on
file will be dismissed in its entirety, with prejudice.
The Court will retain jurisdiction over the parties to enforce the
terms of this Judgment.
A copy of the District Court's January 14, 2014 Final Judgment
is available at http://is.gd/VhMMSCfrom Leagle.com.
KENNA COMPANY: Class Seeks Unpaid Overtime and Wages Under FLSA
---------------------------------------------------------------
Juan Perez-Rodriguez, Victor Banegas, Alberto Duorte, Juan Perez,
Edgar Rivera, et al., on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated v. Kenna Company, LLC and Raymond Kenna, Case
No. 3:14-cv-00014-HEH (E.D. Va., January 6, 2014) seeks unpaid
overtime and unpaid wages, and liquidated damages under the Fair
Labor Standards Act.
Kenna Company LLC is a Virginia limited liability company
headquartered in Chantilly, Virginia. Kenna Co. is in the
painting and drywall business. Raymond Kenna is President or
Member Manager of Kenna Co.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Philip Justus Dean, Esq.
Craig Juraj Curwood, Esq.
CURWOOD LAW FIRM, PLC
707 E. Main Street, Suite 1025
Richmond, VA 23219
Telephone: (804) 788-0808
Facsimile: (804) 767-6777
E-mail: pdean@curwoodlaw.com
ccurwood@curwoodlaw.com
KINNIKINNICK FOODS: Recalls Products Due to Undeclared Milk
-----------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: January 13, 2014
Type of communication: Recall
Alert sub-type: Updated Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory: Allergen - Milk
Hazard classification: Class 1
Source of recall: Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm: Kinnikinnick Foods Inc.
Distribution: National
Extent of the product
distribution: Retail
CFIA reference number: 8552
The food recall warning issued on January 10, 2014 has been
updated to include additional codes. This additional information
was identified during the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's (CFIA)
food safety investigation.
Kinnikinnick Foods is recalling certain Kinnikinnick Foods brand
products from the marketplace because they contain milk which is
not declared on the label. People with an allergy to milk should
not consume the recalled products described below.
The following products have been sold nationally.
If you have an allergy to milk, do not consume the recalled
product as it may cause a serious or life-threatening reaction.
There have been no reported illnesses associated with the
consumption of these products.
The recall was triggered by the company. The Canadian Food
Inspection Agency (CFIA) is conducting a food safety
investigation, which may lead to the recall of other products. If
other high-risk products are recalled the CFIA will notify the
public through updated Food Recall Warnings.
The CFIA is verifying that industry is removing recalled products
from the marketplace.
Brand name Common name UPC
---------- ----------- ---
Kinnikinnick Foods Original Homestyle 6 20133 00198 1
Waffles
Kinnikinnick Foods Cinnamon & Brown Sugar 6 20133 00199 8
Homestyle Waffles
Kinnikinnick Foods Pancake & Waffle Mix 6 20133 10512 2
Kinnikinnick Foods Panko Style Bread Crumbs 6 20133 60015 3
LANE FURNITURE: Chests Pose Child Death Risk Long After Recall
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lisa A. Flam, writing for NBC News.com, reports that the deaths of
two Massachusetts siblings who became trapped in an antique hope
chest are a tragic reminder that dangerous items may remain in
homes even years after a recall, and safety experts are urging
parents to search their homes for the chests and other unsafe
products.
"The majority of children's products that are recalled remain in
use," said Nancy Cowles, executive director of Kids in Danger,
adding that at best, 30 percent of recalled kids' products are
fixed or returned.
"It's very dangerous," she said on Jan. 15. "It's a hidden hazard
in the home. A recalled product doesn't necessarily look
dangerous, so unless you know it's been recalled, your kids are at
risk with the product."
The chest that an 8-year-old girl and her 7-year-old brother
became trapped in on Jan. 12 was made by the Lane Furniture
Company on July 13, 1939, and could not be opened from the inside,
the Norfolk County prosecutor's office said.
In 1996, the company recalled the 12 million cedar chests it made
from 1912 to 1987 with lids that automatically latched shut when
closed, after reports that six children suffocated and died inside
them. The Consumer Product Safety Commission and the company
renewed the search for the chests in 2000, announcing another
suffocation death and two near fatalities.
Mark Massarella knows about the danger first hand: In 1999, his
daughter, Natalie, died at age 15 in a chest the family had
received from the girl's great-grandmother only months earlier.
Natalie was in her room with the door locked and the music on, and
only her sister was home with her.
"We always hope that we can help with our experience to publicize
the fact that these are dangerous and that people need to take
action," he said. "They're passed down from one generation to the
next. They last forever."
Though the recall began before Mr. Massarella's daughter died, he
said he has "never met anybody that ever knew about this recall."
The recall of the chests was one the safety commission's largest
of children's products, though other recalls have covered millions
of other popular items that can be dangerous or deadly for kids,
including drop-side cribs, roll-up window blinds, bassinets, play
yards and jewelry containing lead.
The chests, though, may be a bit different than other recalled
children's product because they are rarely discarded, often kept
for decades as heirlooms, experts said. They urged people to check
their homes for the chests, and to remove the lock or get a free
repair kit from the company.
"We do not want another child to die in a Lane cedar chest," said
Scott Wolfson, spokesman for the Consumer Product Safety
Commission. We need parents, we need grandparents to know there
was a recall years ago, and to check their basement, check their
attic, check their house, and if they have them, it's not too late
to take advantage of the recall."
"This is a life or death situation with this particular recall
announcement," he added.
Not knowing about a recall is the most common reason people don't
comply, Ms. Cowles said.
"With all that's going on in the world, it's unlikely you're going
to hear about it," she said. "Or they hear about it and forgot to
follow up and take action, they don't understand the risk of it or
it's not economically feasible to parents to comply with recalls
for which there isn't a fix."
On Jan. 14, the C.P.S.C. began an investigation into the origin of
the chest involved in the latest deaths.
"It's about understanding how did this product remain in this home
and what can we do in learning more about this family's experience
to help us educate other families," Mr. Wolfson said. "A recall
of 12 million units is so large, we know there's going to be
products that remain in homes."
He could not say how many of the recalled chests are still out
there, and Heritage Home Group, the company that owns Lane, did
not return messages left by phone and email.
Ms. Cowles said parents need to check their homes for recalled
products but said the burden remains on manufacturers to keep
informing the public as people inherit the chests and become
parents themselves.
"The companies that made these chests, many are still in business
and they need to continue to do outreach efforts and campaigns to
get word out to new generations," Ms. Cowles said. "The companies
need to use all the tools at their disposal that they use to sell
the products to get them out of homes once they're found
dangerous."
Safety experts said parents can sign up with various agencies and
organizations including C.P.S.C. for recall announcements,
register their purchases with manufacturers to be notified of
recalls, check products already in their home against recall lists
and be wary of second-hand items. There's also the old-fashioned
advice for child-proofing your home: get down on all fours.
"Get on the floor again and think like a kid," said Anthony Green,
director of public policy for Safe Kids Worldwide. "What can my
5-year-old get into that I'm not thinking about?"
For Mr. Massarella, news of the sibling deaths brought back the
pain of losing his daughter.
"With this new one coming up this week, it brings all this back to
the surface," he said. "It's like it just happened yesterday."
LENNOX NATIONAL: Won't Pay Workers for All Hours Worked, Suit Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
David Swahlen, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated v. Lennox National Accounting Services, LLC, and Lennox
International, Inc., Case No. 4:14-cv-00023 (S.D. Tex., January 6,
2014) alleges that the Defendants require or permit various
employees to work as service technicians at their numerous
worksites across the United States, including Texas, but refuse to
compensate them for all hours actually worked -- in violation of
the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Lennox National Accounting Services, LLC, is a Florida Corporation
headquartered in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. Lennox International,
Inc., is a Delaware corporation conducting business in Texas with
its headquarters in Richardson, Texas.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Galvin B. Kennedy, Esq.
Gabriel Assaad, Esq.
Beatriz Sosa-Morris, Esq.
KENNEDY HODGES, L.L.P.
711 W. Alabama St.
Houston, TX 77006
Telephone: (713) 523-0001
Facsimile: (713) 523-1116
E-mail: gkennedy@kennedyhodges.com
Bsosamorris@kennedyhodges.com
LONDON DRUGS: Recalls Nika-S Pomegranate Juice
----------------------------------------------
Starting date: January 7, 2014
Type of communication: Recall
Alert sub-type: Notification
Subcategory: Chemical
Hazard classification: Class 3
Source of recall: Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm: London Drugs Limited, Parthenon Food
Importers Ltd., Golden Bright
Enterprises Ltd.
Distribution: Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba,
Saskatchewan
Extent of the product
distribution: Retail
CFIA reference number: 8527
Affected products: 1 L. Nika-S 100% Pure Pomegranate Juice with
UPC 4 630009 560067 and Date of production: 10.01.2012
LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: Faces Third Class Action Over Formaldehyde
--------------------------------------------------------------
Gregory Connolly, writing for Williamsburg Yorktown Daily, reports
that a class action lawsuit representing Lumber Liquidators
customers in three states has been filed in federal court, marking
the third class-action lawsuit the company now faces.
The latest suit is filed on behalf of customers in Virginia, New
York and Alabama who purchased wood products from the Toano-based
company. Like another class-action suit filed on behalf of
customers and one filed on behalf of shareholders of the company,
the new suit alleges the company sold wood with elevated levels of
formaldehyde and the company knowingly bought wood from the
habitat of an endangered tiger, a violation of both Russian and
U.S. law.
According to the suit, "economic and injunctive relief" is sought
for those who purchased wood flooring the company imported from
China. It is not seeking damages from personal injuries caused by
formaldehyde exposure. A jury trial has been requested in the
suit.
The aggregated claims for the class represented by the suit exceed
$5 million, according to a complaint filed in U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Virginia.
The complaint features allegations from three customers.
Two Alabama residents purchased Morningstar Bamboo brand flooring
directly from the company which was then installed in their home.
According to the complaint, Lumber Liquidators represented the
wood as being in compliance with formaldehyde standards. A
Virginia man and a New York woman also purchased and installed the
Morningstar Bamboo brand flooring.
MABIM INTERNATIONAL: Sued for Infliction of Emotional Distress
--------------------------------------------------------------
Valentina Madrid, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Mabim International Suppliers, Inc., a
Florida corporation, Marco E. Baca, individually, Case No. 1:14-
cv-20051-CMA (S.D. Fla., January 6, 2014) is brought for
violations under the Fair Labor Standards Act, and for intentional
infliction of emotional distress under Florida law. The Plaintiff
seeks unpaid wages, liquidated damages, pre-judgment interest,
post-judgment interest, and reasonable attorney's fee and costs
from the Defendants.
Mabim International is a Florida corporation. Marco E. Baca is a
resident of Florida, who owned and operated Mabim International.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Brian J. Militzok, Esq
MILITZOK & LEVY, P.A.
The Yankee Clipper Law Center
3230 Stirling Road, Suite 1
Hollywood, FL 33021
Telephone: (954) 727-8570
Facsimile: (954) 241-6857
E-mail: bjm@mllawfl.com
MAC ACQUISITION: Class Seeks to Recover Minimum & Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Juan J. Cortes, Yojan Cortes, Adolfo Garcia, Amanda Gonzales,
Hipolito M. Marrero, Hernan M. Minaya, Roberto J. Rosales, Jose A.
Salas, On Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated
v. Mac Acquisition, LLC, d/b/a Romano's Macaroni Grill, Case No.
1:14-cv-00042-JOF (N.D. Ga., January 6, 2014) is brought under the
Fair Labor Standards Act to recover unpaid minimum wages, overtime
pay, liquidated damages, prejudgment interest, costs, and
attorney's fees against Mac Acquisition, LLC.
The Company is a limited liability company headquartered in Texas.
The Company operates several restaurants throughout the United
States, including the restaurants in Buford and Alpharetta,
Georgia, where the Plaintiffs worked.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Thomas Y. Choi, Esq.
Connie K. Yoon, Esq.
THOMAS CHOI LAW FIRM
5164 Buford Highway
Doraville, GA 30340
Telephone: (770) 457-9630
E-mail: tychoi@thomaschoilaw.com
ckyoon@thomaschoilaw.com
MOVING COMPANY: Fails to Pay Overtime Compensation, Suit Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
Morris Aaronson, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. The Moving Company, Relocation Division,
Inc., a Florida corporation, Benjamin Aaronson, individually, and
Peter Aaronson, individually, Case No. 9:14-cv-80014-KAM (S.D.
Fla., January 6, 2014) accuses the Defendants of violating the
Fair Labor Standards Act. The Plaintiff seeks unpaid wages,
unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages or pre-judgment
interest, post-judgment interest, reasonable attorney's fee and
costs from the Defendants.
The Moving Company is a Florida corporation. The Individual
Defendants are owners or operators of the Company.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Brian J. Militzok, Esq.
MILITZOK & LEVY, P.A.
The Yankee Clipper Law Center
3230 Stirling Road, Suite 1
Hollywood, FL 33021
Telephone: (954) 727-8570
Facsimile: (954) 241-6857
E-mail: bjm@mllawfl.com
NELSON & KENNARD: Trial Court Judgment in "Tourgeman" Suit Flipped
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Court of Appeals of California, Fourth District, Division One,
reversed the judgment and the attorney fees and costs order in
DAVID TOURGEMAN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. NELSON & KENNARD et
al., Defendants and Respondents, NO. D063473, and remanded the
matter to the trial court with directions to deny respondents'
motion for attorney fees and costs.
David Tourgeman brought this putative class and representative
action against Dell Financial Services, L.P. (Dell Financial
Services)and respondents Nelson & Kennard and Robert Kennard,
contending that respondents violated the Fair Debt Collections
Practices Act (FDCPA) (15 U.S.C. Section 1692 et seq.) while
attempting to collect a debt that he incurred in connection with
his purchase of a Dell computer. Mr. Tourgeman brought a single
claim under the Unfair Competition Law (UCL) (Bus. & Prof. Code,
Section 17200) seeking an injunction to prevent respondents from
engaging in unlawful, unfair, and/or fraudulent debt collection
practices in the future. Respondents filed a special motion to
strike pursuant to the anti-SLAPP statute (Code Civ. Proc.,
Section 425.16).
Mr. Tourgeman voluntarily dismissed his action against
respondents. After the action was dismissed, respondents filed a
motion for attorney fees. Mr. Tourgeman opposed the motion. In his
opposition, Mr. Tourgeman conceded that the trial court had
jurisdiction to rule on respondents' motion for attorney fees, but
argued that the trial court was required to determine whether
respondents would have prevailed on their special motion to strike
as a prerequisite to awarding them attorney fees under the anti-
SLAPP statute. Mr. Tourgeman further argued that respondents would
not have prevailed on their special motion to strike because the
action was exempt from the anti-SLAPP statute, under the public
interest exception to the statute (Section 425.17).
The trial court determined that Tourgeman had failed to
demonstrate that the public interest exception applied to his
lawsuit, and entered an order to this effect. The court awarded
attorney fees and costs to respondents in the amount of $11,581.
The court later entered judgment in favor of respondents in this
same amount. On appeal, Mr. Tourgeman contended that the trial
court erred in concluding that his action was not subject to the
public interest exception (Section 425.17, subd. (b)) to the anti-
SLAPP statute.
The Calif. Appeals Court concluded that Mr. Tourgeman's action
satisfied each of the requirements of the public interest
exception and that his complaint was, therefore, not subject to a
special motion to strike. The trial court, thus, erred in
awarding respondents attorney fees and costs pursuant to the anti-
SLAPP statute, the Calif. Appeals Court ruled.
A copy of the Appeals Court's January 16, 2014 Opinion is
available at http://is.gd/nuudgkfrom Leagle.com.
For Plaintiff and Appellant:
Frank J. Johnson, Esq.
Brett Michael Weaver, Esq.
JOHNSON & WEAVER, LLP
110 West "A" Street, Suite 750
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 230-0063
Facsimile: (619) 255-1856
Simmonds & Narita, Tomio Buck Narita -- tnarita@snllp.com -- and
Jeffrey A. Topor -- jtopor@snllp.com -- for Defendants and
Respondents.
NEW JERSEY: Governor Faces Class Actions Over Bridge Lane Closure
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Mary Pat Gallagher, writing for New Jersey Law Journal, reports
that the scandal over the closure of local Fort Lee access lanes
to the George Washington Bridge last September orchestrated by
Gov. Chris Christie's aides and appointees has spilled into the
courts, as class-action suits are being lodged by people and
businesses claiming they were damaged by the gridlock.
The suits come as the state Legislature and the U.S. Attorney's
Office are investigating the closures, which are alleged to have
been political payback against Fort Lee Mayor Mark Sokolich, a
Democrat, for not endorsing Christie's reelection last fall.
The first, Galicki v. State of New Jersey, was filed in federal
court in Newark on Jan. 9, against Christie, his former deputy
chief of staff Bridget Kelly, the state, and the Port Authority of
New York and New Jersey, which operates the bridge.
Also named were two former Port Authority employees, both Christie
appointees, who resigned last month over the scandal: Deputy
Executive Director Bill Baroni and Director of Interstate Capital
Projects David Wildstein.
Six individual plaintiffs claim they were adversely impacted by
the lane closings, which took place on Sept. 9 through 15,
including Kim Joscelyn, identified as an hourly employee of
Rosemarie Arnold's Fort Lee law firm, which filed the suit.
Residents of Fort Lee or nearby towns, they were en route to their
jobs on those days -- four of them by traversing the bridge to
New York City, the complaint says.
All claim they became trapped in Fort Lee traffic, delaying their
arrival at work and resulting in lost wages for two of them. They
have sued for violation of the due process and privileges and
immunities clauses of the U.S. Constitution, saying they were
deprived of life, liberty and property and their right of free
ingress into and egress out of other states. They also assert
tort claims: negligent hiring and retention against Christie, the
state and the Port Authority and breach of a duty to refrain from
using a political position for purposes of retaliation, against
all defendants. They seek to represent a class defined as
thousands of individuals and business owners who sustained
economic, physical or psychological injury as a result of the
clogged Fort Lee traffic.
An amended complaint filed on Jan. 14 added several more counts
and three new plaintiffs: a Bergen Community College student, a
tractor-trailer driver and a newspaper delivery company.
The other suit, GW Car Service LLC v. State of New Jersey, was
filed on Jan. 13 in Bergen County Superior Court by individuals
and taxi and limousine companies. They bring federal and state
civil rights claims for alleged constitutional violations along
with claims for civil racketeering and conspiracy.
The suit names the Christie for Governor campaign and his campaign
manager Bill Stepien and chief spokesman Michael Drewniak, whose
names appear in emails released by Mr. Wildstein pursuant to a
subpoena from the state Assembly's Transportation, Public Works
and Independent Authorities committee. It does not name Christie
himself or the Port Authority.
Former State Bar president Barry Epstein of Rochelle Park, who
brought the case, along with his son Michael, says he filed in
state court because of concern about state immunity from suit in
federal court under the 11th Amendment and he did not sue Christie
because he is taking him at his word for now when he denies
ordering the closures. He plans to add the Port Authority but
says it requires 60 days' notice, which on Jan. 14 he was
preparing to file. He says the bistate agency violated New
Jersey's Consumer Fraud Act claim by collecting tolls from people
crossing the bridge while hindering their ability to do so. He
will seek to recoup all of the $12 tolls collected while the lanes
were blocked, subject to trebling under the act, which also
provides for attorney fees.
The putative class has many thousands of members who can be
identified through EZPass records and license plate photographs
taken at the toll plazas, he says.
Ms. Arnold terms Mr. Epstein's complaint a copycat suit and calls
it "unbelievable" that he did not name Christie.
"Perhaps his administration's bullying and revenge tactics have
succeeded in intimidating certain claimants," remarks Arnold.
Christie spokesmen Michael Drewniak and Colin Reed did not respond
to a request for comment on the lawsuits.
Nor did lawyers for Messrs. Wildstein and Baroni: respectively,
Alan Zegas, who heads a Chatham firm and represented former Newark
Mayor Sharpe James in a corruption prosecution by then-U.S.
Attorney Christie, and Michael Himmel, a former prosecutor now
with Lowenstein Sandler in Roseland.
The documents subpoenaed from Mr. Wildstein, which were made
public on Jan. 8, show that Ms. Kelly gave the go-ahead for the
lane closures to Mr. Wildstein, who implemented them.
Ms. Kelly emailed Mr. Wildstein "Time for some traffic problems in
Fort Lee" and Mr. Wildstein replied "Got it."
At a Jan. 9 press conference, Gov. Christie apologized for the
lane closures but denied ordering them or knowing that any of his
staff were involved until the day before the conference. He also
announced that he had fired Ms. Kelly, claiming she had misled
him. He further stated that he had asked Mr. Stepien -- who
exchanged emails with Mr. Wildstein over the closures -- to
withdraw his name from consideration for the post of state
Republican Party chairman and to give up a consultancy with the
Republican Governors Association, chaired by Gov. Christie.
At the Jan. 14 state of the state address, Gov. Christie touched
on the scandal, saying, "Mistakes were clearly made," "we let down
the people we are entrusted to serve" and "we will cooperate with
all appropriate inquiries to ensure this breach of trust does not
happen again."
More subpoenas are expected. Assembly Democrats are forming a
special committee to continue the investigation and on Jan. 14
appointed Reid Schar -- rschar@jenner.com -- of Jenner & Block in
Chicago, a former assistant U.S. attorney, as special counsel to
assist it. Senate President Stephen Sweeney, D-Gloucester, said a
similar committee will be established in that house.
U.S. Attorney Paul Fishman is conducting a probe at the request of
the Port Authority Office of Inspector General.
In addition, the Assembly Transportation Committee on Jan. 13
referred contempt charges against Mr. Wildstein to the Mercer
County Prosecutor's Office over his refusal to answer questions
while invoking the Fifth Amendment.
Also on Jan. 13, Sens. Loretta Weinberg, D-Bergen, whose district
includes Fort Lee, and Raymond Lesniak, D-Union, asked the Bergen
County prosecutor to look into the closings.
NEW JERSEY: Gov. Adds Gibson Dunn as Counsel in Bridge Class Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Sara Randazzo, writing for The Am Law Daily, reports that
Randy Mastro -- rmastro@gibsondunn.com -- the Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher partner and former New York City deputy mayor has been
hired to advise New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie in connection with
the ongoing fallout from last fall's closing of toll lanes leading
to the George Washington Bridge.
Gov. Christie's office announced on Jan. 16 that Mr. Mastro will
lead a Gibson Dunn team hired to assist with an internal review of
the events surrounding the four-day traffic snarl that plagued
suburban Fort Lee as a result of the lane closings. Since the
simmering controversy erupted into a full-blown scandal with the
release of hundreds of pages of documents related to the bridge
incident, four people close to the Republican governor have either
resigned or been fired amid revelations that they may taken part
in a scheme to deliberately shut the lanes down to punish
Fort Lee's Democratic mayor.
Gibson Dunn will also assist the Christie administration with a
separate investigation that local U.S. attorney Paul Fishman is
conducting into the bridge matter, the release said.
"Their presence will bring an outside, third-party perspective to
the situation, and they will be a valuable asset as we move
forward," a Christie spokesman said in a statement. "This
administration is committed to ensuring that what happened here
never happens again. That's what the people of New Jersey
deserve."
Gibson Dunn is the second Am Law 100 firm to take a role in what
could prove to be a politically damaging episode for
Gov. Christie, who is widely considered a leading contender for
the Republican presidential nomination in 2016.
On Jan. 15, Jenner & Block partner Reid Schar -- himself a former
federal prosecutor whose credentials include leading the
prosecution of former Illinois Gov. Rod Blogojevich -- was hired
to serve as outside counsel to a New Jersey General Assembly
committee conducting its own investigation into the bridge matter.
By bringing in a Gibson Dunn team, and Mr. Mastro in particular,
Gov. Christie is adding considerable litigation muscle.
NEW YORK, NY: Settles Claims in Suit Over Mass Arrests for $18MM
----------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Hamblett, writing for New York Law Journal, reports that
New York City has agreed to pay $18 million to settle claims from
mass arrests during the 2004 Republican National Convention, a
move that activists and civil rights attorneys hailed on Jan. 15
as a victory for constitutional rights.
At a combined press conference and rally on the steps of City
Hall, speakers said the settlement was a vindication of their
claim that police had no right to arrest people without
individualized probable cause.
Christopher Dunn, associate legal director of the New York Civil
Liberties Union, said the arrest of some 1,800 protestors,
bystanders, legal observers and journalists was "one of the
darkest moments in New York City protest history," but plaintiffs
in the nearly 10-year-old litigation showed that the police should
not be allowed to "trample on the First Amendment rights of
protestors."
Celeste Koeleveld, executive assistant corporation counsel for
public safety, said the courts turned back an attempt to restrict
policies and practices the city uses to police mass events.
"It was vitally important to defend the city in this litigation,
and we are proud of the major victories we achieved," she said in
a statement.
Under the $18 million settlement, which is pending approval by
Southern District Judge Richard Sullivan, each plaintiff will
receive about $6,400, according to the city law department.
Plaintiffs lawyers' fees will comprise $7.6 million of the total
settlement.
According to the Law Department's calculations, it spent an
estimated $16 million internally to vigorously defend the 430
cases in addition to the settlement -- roughly $7 million for
court cases and the remainder reflecting the salaries and hours of
its own attorneys.
The city also turned to private law firms that provided their
services pro bono: Simpson Thacher & Bartlett, Proskauer Rose,
Fulbright & Jaworski and Linklaters.
Throughout the litigation, Law Department attorneys defended the
police department's prerogative to minimize disruption as much as
possible during the convention and head off what Ms. Koeleveld
once described as the "tripartite threat" of "domestic and
international terrorism, anarchistic violence and unlawful civil
disobedience."
The city's attorneys cited examples of how law enforcement had
been overwhelmed in other contexts by mass civil disobedience and
protests, including the 1999 "Battle for Seattle" that shut down a
World Trade Organization conference, and noted the number of
terror attacks aimed at New York City, including a plot to bomb
the subway in Herald Square uncovered just a month before the
convention.
But plaintiffs lawyers said the police were being alarmist and
blamed the city for belatedly revealing in 2006 that police had
based their preparations on information collected from a
"previously unknown" surveillance operation.
That revelation set off a long discovery battle as plaintiffs
lawyers sought documents and other evidence about police
surveillance.
The Law Department aggressively defended the concept of "mass
probable cause" to clear the streets and the actions of police
throughout the convention, which was held one year after mass
demonstrations in New York City protesting the Iraq war and
President Bush, putting police on high alert heading into the
event.
Before and during the convention, police made a series of mass
arrests for violations such as disorderly conduct and parading
without a permit -- violations that would normally earn only a
summons. But the police had adopted a no-summons policy for the
convention and elected to fingerprint those charged with
violations.
Many of the arrestees were taken to makeshift holding facility at
a former bus terminal on Pier 57 on the Hudson River and held for
hours, or days in some cases.
After the convention, a class action and more than 500 individual
lawsuits were filed challenging the arrests, the fingerprinting
policy, the no-summons policy and the detentions on Pier 57 where
people were held 24 to 48 hours without processing in allegedly
terrible conditions.
The next 10 years were spent in depositions, fights over
documents, challenges to NYPD surveillance policies, and an appeal
to the Second Circuit.
The stage was finally set for settlement with a series of rulings
Judge Sullivan made on summary judgment motions in 2012.
During oral arguments, Dunn, Jonathan Moore -- jmoore@blhny.com --
of Beldock Levine & Hoffman and Michael Spiegel, three of the 15
plaintiffs lawyers who signed off on the Jan. 15 settlement asked
Sullivan to hold police accountable for unconstitutional mass
arrests and detention.
The first mass arrest of 225 demonstrators, part of a march
organized by the War Resisters League, occurred on Fulton Street
between Church and Broadway and headed toward Madison Square
Garden on Aug. 31, just after 4 p.m. The arrests became the case
of Schiller v. City of New York, 04 Civ. 7922 (NYLJ, June 1,
2012).
Then, some three hours later, hundreds of protestors who had moved
into the roadway on East 16th Street between Irving Place and
Union Square were swept up by police in what became the case
Dinler v. City of New York, 04 Civ. 7921.
Between 8 and 10 p.m. that same night, police arrested a number of
people on West 17th Street and Union Square, including people who
said they were bystanders, in what became the case of MacNamara v.
City of New York, 04 Civ. 9216.
The name plaintiff in that case, Deirdre MacNamara, said at City
Hall on Jan. 15 she was arrested on 17th Street while going to
"get a milkshake" at a local fast food restaurant and then held
for 50 hours on the pier.
Police said people were marching in the street without a permit,
but demonstrators said they were not given a chance to disperse.
Before Judge Sullivan, Special Assistant Corporation Counsel
Peter Farrell argued people indeed had the opportunity to
disperse, and police were forced to take action to clear the
streets. Mr. Farrell told Judge Sullivan that "the indisputable
message of the Republican National Convention was that 800,000
people demonstrated without incident and just 1,800 people, or
'less than .2 percent'" were arrested.
Judge Sullivan said the percentage of those arrested was hardly
relevant to the question of whether the probable cause requirement
of the Fourth Amendment was met. But Judge Sullivan said he
thought the police did a good job during the convention, "nothing
blew up" and people were able to protest.
Judge Sullivan issued his rulings in October 2012. He granted
summary judgment to the Fulton Street marchers, finding they had
been given contradictory instructions by police and essentially
forced into the street. The judge denied summary judgment to both
sides on the East 16th Street arrests, finding it an open question
of fact as to whether protesters had an opportunity to disperse.
"Dispersal orders play an important, though not essential, role in
making such individualized determinations of probable cause,"
Judge Sullivan wrote. "Although the Court declines to find that a
dispersal order is an absolute prerequisite under the Fourth
Amendment to finding that all arrestees in a mass arrest are
violating the law, it nevertheless recognizes that police efforts
to sort lawbreakers from bystanders, and to advise the latter that
they should leave, are highly probative of whether it would be
reasonable to conclude that every person arrested violated the
law."
At City Hall on Jan. 15, Jonathan Moore said the settlement
"reaffirms the principle that there is no such thing as group
probable cause."
However, Ms. Koeleveld pointed to Judge Sullivan's other rulings
as victories for the city -- namely the judge's conclusion that
the city's decision to arrest people for disorderly conduct and
parading without a permit, and its decision to fingerprint
arrestees, comported with the Constitution.
Among other wins, Ms. Koeleveld cited the Law Department's
successful effort to keep "sensitive and confidential intelligence
documents from being disclosed" under the law enforcement
privilege, a decision upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals.
More than 100 cases were settled in 2006 for a total of about $1.8
million after the Law Department made an offer. Many of the
settlements were for $2,500, $5,000 or $7,500 plus attorney fees.
But plaintiffs lawyers argued that the city stretched out the
litigation because it was invested politically in defending police
actions, and they criticized the Law Department for using outside
firms to abet slow motion practice.
Speakers at the press conference blamed the Bloomberg
administration and police for a heavy-handed approach to the
convention.
"What happened was an orchestrated plan led by the intelligence
division of the NYPD to suppress peaceful protest," attorney
Alan Levine said.
Rose Weber, who represented more than 175 plaintiffs, said the
NYPD set out to "clear the street of protestors before George Bush
arrived at the convention," and then make sure they stayed off the
street by detaining them in "miserable" conditions at the Pier.
Plaintiffs in the class action will receive $4 million and
individual plaintiffs will receive $6,345,869.
The Law Department puts the figure as "up to $10.3 million."
Of the $7.6 million that will be paid to plaintiffs lawyers, $5
million of that amount will be paid to counsel for attorneys for
individual plaintiffs.
Attorney Martin Stolar said on Jan. 15 that $500,000 of that
amount would be donated to a fund that would be dedicated to the
"defense of the right to protest."
NORTH CAROLINA: Faces Class Action Over Medicaid Payment System
---------------------------------------------------------------
Kyle Murphy, writing for EHRIntelligence.com, reports that the
North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)
faces a class action for its implementation and operation of the
Medicaid Management Information System (MMIS), NCTracks.
DHHS Secretary Aldona Wos revealed that the state agency was
experiencing a number of problems as a result of implementing
provisions of the Affordable Care Act.
The lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of Wake County alleges
that DHHS and its MMIS partners -- Computer Sciences Corporation
(CSC, the system developer), Maximus Consulting Services (the
organization responsible for system validation and verification),
and SLI Global Solutions (the organization responsible for testing
prior to launch) -- are the cause of millions of dollars in
damages to North Carolina Medicaid providers since the launch of
NCTracks on July 1, 2013.
"In all, NCTracks had over 3,200 software errors in the first few
months of operation, and payments to Medicaid providers were
delayed, unpaid, or 'shorted' by over half a billion dollars in
the first 90 days," states the 48-page lawsuit via NC Policy
Watch.
According to the allegations in the lawsuit, the state agency's
first attempt ended in a failure in 2006, with the state footing
$30 million for a new system that never panned out. The following
year, a new request for proposal (RFP) was issued in July and then
withdrawn, revised, and reissued in December. A $287-million
contract was eventually rewarded to CSC which indicated a
completion deadline of Aug. 22, 2011. The deadline was missed by
nearly two years and the budget almost doubled as well as $207 was
added to the budget.
According to the lawsuit, CSC intended to reuse 90 percent of the
Common Business-Oriented Language (COBOL) code from the New York
MMIS to create NCTracks. Ultimately, the MMIS developer decided
to reuse only 32 percent of the code and opted to write new code,
leading to delays and opening the system up to new flaws.
CSC has deemed the lawsuit without merit, but findings from the
state's own auditing of the system appears to show otherwise when
it revealed that 600 of the known 3,200 defects in existence since
July 1 had not be remediated by November 5.
The lawsuit has received backing from the likes of the North
Carolina Medical Society.
A copy of the lawsuit is available at:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/200139666/Nc-Tracks
PEOPLES BANCORP: Wants N.C. Court to Strike Certification Motion
----------------------------------------------------------------
Peoples Bancorp of North Carolina, Inc. wants the North Carolina
Business Court to strike out a motion to certify as class action a
suit related to overdraft fees, according to the company's Nov. 5,
2013, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2013.
On April 2, 2013, the Bank received notice that a lawsuit was
filed against it in the General Court of Justice, Superior Court
Division, Lincoln County, North Carolina. The complaint alleges
(i) breach of contract and the covenants of good faith and fair
dealing by the Bank, (ii) conversion, (iii) unjust enrichment and
(iv) violations of the North Carolina Unfair and Deceptive Trade
Practices Act in its assessment and collection of overdraft fees.
It seeks the refund of overdraft fees, treble damages, attorneys'
fees and injunctive relief. The Plaintiff seeks to have the
lawsuit certified as a class action. The Bank believes that the
allegations in the complaint are without merit and intends to
vigorously defend the lawsuit, including the request that the
lawsuit be certified as a class action. On June 6, 2013, the Bank
filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings, which was heard in
the North Carolina Business Court on October 1, 2013. The Court
has not ruled on that motion as of November 4, 2013.
STRICK: Recalls Trailer Due to Defective Rear Impact Guard Gussets
------------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: December 20, 2013
Type of communication: Recall
Subcategory: Heavy Trailer
Notification type: Compliance Mfr
System: Structure
Units affected: 145
Source of recall: Transport Canada
Identification number: 2013461
TC ID number: 2013461
Certain trailers may not comply with the requirements of Canada
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 223 - Rear Impact Guards. On
certain tandem and tri-axle 53 foot van trailers equipped with
pintle hooks, the rear impact guard may not meet the minimum load
requirement of the standard. This could increase the risk of
injury in the event of a rear impact crash.
Dealers will install replacement rear impact guard gussets for
affected units.
Affected products:
Maker Model Model year(s) affected
----- ----- ----------------------
STRICK TRAILER 2009, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014
TARGET CORP: Senators Introduce Data Security Act After Breach
--------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Ramonas, writing for Corporate Counsel, reports that
Sens. Tom Carper (D-Del.) and Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) are taking aim at
retailers with new legislation intended to improve safeguards for
consumer information, following recent revelations about data
breaches at Target Corp. and Neiman Marcus Group Ltd.
The Data Security Act, which the bipartisan duo introduced on
Jan. 15, would require companies that accept credit or debit card
payments to have policies and procedures in place to protect
consumer data from hackers and act on breaches when they occur.
Under the bill, businesses would have to investigate breaches and
work to secure the data targeted by hackers.
Companies also would have to tell their customers and federal
authorities about any breaches. And if a breach involves at least
5,000 customers, businesses must notify credit-reporting agencies,
too.
The senators, who introduced similar legislation in the last
Congress, said the measure would provide clarity to companies,
which currently must comply with a variety of state laws on
breaches. The District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, the Virgin
Islands and 46 states all have differing statutes that concern
breach notifications, according to the National Conference of
State Legislatures.
"As the recent incidents involving Target and Neiman Marcus remind
us, major data breaches that compromise consumers' identities and
financial security are becoming more routine," Sen. Carper said in
a written statement. "These recent breaches, and others before
them, underscore the need for Congress to act to protect Americans
against fraud and identity theft."
The National Retail Federation, the leading trade group for
domestic retailers, expressed concern about the bill.
David French, the group's senior vice president for government
relations, said the measure needs to address the U.S. bankcard
industry, which he said favors magnetic-stripe cards over more
secure PIN-and-chip technology.
"While the Data Security bill aims to protect consumer data, the
bill carves out banks, card companies and others financial
institutions, the very parties who have been primarily responsible
for sustaining the currently-flawed system," Mr. French said in a
written statement. "The National Retail Federation looks forward
to working with lawmakers as the process moves forward."
The legislation follows mounting concern in Congress about the
security of consumer information.
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), the Senate Judiciary Committee's
chairman, recently introduced the Personal Data Privacy and
Security Act, a breach measure that he has offered in each of the
past four Congresses. Sen. Leahy said he plans to hold a hearing
this year on breaches.
In the House of Representatives, Rep. Terry Lee (R-Neb.), chairman
of the Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade Subcommittee of the
Energy and Commerce Committee, intends to have a hearing in the
first week of February on breaches. Officials from law
enforcement agencies and Target will be among the witnesses.
Target on Jan. 10 revealed that as many as 110 million customers
may have had their personal information stolen during the holiday
shopping season. When the company first confirmed the breach on
Dec. 19, it said the breach may have exposed as many as 40 million
customers to fraud.
On Jan. 10, Neiman Marcus also confirmed that a breach occurred.
But the luxury retailer has yet to say when the breach happened
and how many customers it may have affected.
The Dec. 19 acknowledgement from Target and the Jan. 10
confirmation from Neiman both came after reports from data and
security blog KrebsOnSecurity. Both of the companies have said
they are taking steps to notify customers about the breaches and
are working with law enforcement authorities.
"The security of our customers' information is always a priority
and we sincerely regret any inconvenience," according to a tweet
from Neiman Marcus.
Jason Weinstein, a Steptoe & Johnson partner and a former Justice
Department official who focuses on privacy and data security
issues, predicted last month that Target will face millions of
dollars in legal fees connected to its breach. "Data privacy and
security class action suits have become the ambulance-chasing of
the 21st century," he wrote on Steptoe's Cyberblog.
TOYOTA MOTOR: Recalls Matrix Cars Due to Incorrect Tire Size Info
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: December 20, 2013
Type of communication: Recall
Subcategory: Car
Notification type: Compliance Mfr
System: Label
Units affected: 146
Source of recall: Transport Canada
Identification number: 2013462
TC ID number: 2013462
Manufacturer recall
number: SSC226
Certain vehicles may not comply with the requirements of Canada
Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 110 - Tire Selection and Rims. The
Tire and Loading Information label may contain incorrect front
tire size information.
Dealers will inspect the Tire and Loading Information Label and
install a revised label if necessary.
Affected products: 2014 Toyota Matrix
UNFI CANADA: Recalls Alprose Swiss Baking Choco Due to Allergen
---------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: January 8, 2014
Type of communication: Recall
Alert sub-type: Allergy Alert
Subcategory: Allergen - Milk
Hazard classification: Class 3
Source of recall: Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm: UNFI Canada Central Region
Distribution: British Columbia, Nova Scotia, Ontario,
Quebec
Extent of the product
distribution: Retail
CFIA reference number: 8537
Affected products: 300 g. Alprose Swiss Baking Chocolate with UPC
7 12963 00028 6
UNITED STATES: Tech Companies Seek Surveillance Program Reforms
---------------------------------------------------------------
Todd Ruger, writing for Legal Times, reports that lawmakers, civil
rights advocates and tech companies shared a basic response to
President Barack Obama's surveillance reforms: Good first step,
but there's more to be done.
Congress needs to take action to address concerns about the scope
of surveillance programs, Pres. Obama said. Much of the reaction
focused on proposed changes to the most controversial program --
the bulk collection of telephone records by the National Security
Agency under Section 215 of the USA Patriot Act.
Pres. Obama also called for greater transparency when it comes to
the secretive Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court, which
oversees NSA surveillance efforts.
A group of tech companies that are pushing for reforms --
including Apple, Facebook, Microsoft Corp., Twitter, Yahoo! and
AOL -- issued a joint statement after Pres. Obama's speech.
Several of the companies last year filed petitions in the
surveillance court seeking the ability to provide more information
about government demands for consumer data.
"The commitments outlined by President Obama represent positive
progress on key issues including transparency from the government
and in what companies will be allowed to disclose, extending
privacy protections to non-US citizens, and FISA court reform,"
the companies wrote.
"Crucial details remain to be addressed on these issues, and
additional steps are needed on other important issues, so we'll
continue to work with the Administration and Congress to keep the
momentum going and advocate for reforms consistent with the
principles we outlined in December."
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), chairman of the Senate Judiciary
Committee and a proponent of NSA reform, said he was encouraged
that Pres. Obama embraced "the growing consensus that the Section
215 phone records program should not continue in its current
form."
Sen. Leahy said he would work with the administration as it
develops alternatives to the government control of the phone
record database, such as either the service providers themselves
or a third party. The database contains millions of records of
Americans' calls.
"The President has ordered some significant changes, but more are
needed," Sen. Leahy said. "Section 215 must still be amended,
legislatively, to ensure it is not used for dragnet surveillance
in the future, and we must fight to create an effective,
institutional advocate at the FISA court."
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) said
the bulk telephone data collection program is in need of
significant reform. He said his committee would hold hearings on
surveillance issues, including where the phone database would be
stored.
"While I agree that the government storage of this information is
one real concern that needs to be addressed, there are many
others," Mr. Goodlatte said. "In addition, third party storage
itself is a very difficult proposal that raises additional
concerns."
Anthony Romero, the executive director of the American Civil
Liberties Union, said the group welcomed Pres. Obama's call for
reform -- to a point.
"However, the president's decision not to end bulk collection and
retention of all Americans' data remains highly troubling,"
Mr. Romero said. "The president outlined a process to study the
issue further and appears open to alternatives. But the president
should end -- not mend -- the government's collection and
retention of all law-abiding Americans' data."
Orin Kerr, a Fourth Amendment scholar who teaches at George
Washington University Law School, raised questions about the
constitutionality of one of Pres. Obama's proposed changes.
Mr. Kerr, writing on The Volokh Conspiracy blog, highlighted
Pres. Obama's plan to require government lawyers ask surveillance
court judges to limit queries of the Section 215 database.
"That is, he will ask the judiciary to take on a new power to
limit the Executive, so that the Executive can only query the
database when the executive gets a court order signed by the
FISC," Mr. Kerr wrote. "Maybe I'm just old-fashioned, but doesn't
Congress need to be involved in this little enterprise? The FISC
is a creation of Congress. It has no power to do anything that
Congress doesn't grant it."
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), one of the surveillance programs most
vocal critics on Capitol Hill, said Pres. Obama left in place a
system that violates the Fourth Amendment protection against
unreasonable search and seizure. Sen. Paul has said he plans to
file a class action against the Obama administration over the
program.
USEC INC: 6th Cir. Upholds Dismissal of Ohio Labor Class Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld the
decision of the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Ohio, Eastern Division to dismiss a suit filed against
USEC Inc. by a former Portsmouth gaseous diffusion plant employee
and dismissed plaintiffs' appeal, according to the company's Nov.
5, 2013, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended Sept. 30, 2013.
On June 27, 2011, a complaint was filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern
Division, against USEC by a former Portsmouth GDP employee
claiming that USEC owes severance benefits to him and other
similarly situated employees that have transitioned or will
transition to the DOE D&D contractor. The plaintiff amended its
complaint on August 31, 2011 and February 10, 2012, among other
things, to limit the purported class of similarly situated
employees to salaried employees at the Portsmouth site who
transitioned to the D&D contractor and are allegedly eligible for
or owed benefits. On October 11, 2012, the United States District
Court granted USEC's motion to dismiss the complaint and dismissed
Plaintiffs' motion for class certification as moot. The Plaintiffs
filed an appeal on January 18, 2013. On July 19, 2013, the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld the District Court
decision and dismissed the Plaintiffs' appeal. The Plaintiffs have
no further rights to appeal. USEC had not accrued any amounts for
this matter.
* American Tort Reform Foundation Publishes Judicial Hellholes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Max Brantley, writing for Arkansas Times, reports that a lobby
group hoping to wreck personal injury lawsuits, the American Tort
Reform Foundation, has published its latest account of Judicial
Hellholes. These are jurisdictions where the moneyed class can't
get an even break from the courts. Arkansas gets only the barest
of mentions, though you might gather from Arkansas State Chamber
of Commerce caterwauling that Arkansas business is on the point of
collapse from work of greedy trial lawyers, runaway juries and the
like. But about that one mention, which came in relation to class
action litigation:
Lower courts need a reminder that magic words do not control CAFA
[Class Action Fairness Act] jurisdiction. Fortunately, the
Supreme Court just provided one: in its March 2013 decision in
Standard Fire Insurance Co. v. Knowles. The case arose in Miller
County, Arkansas, where, as reported by Fortune, "a handful of
local law firms have made almost $400 million in fees over the
past seven years, all from class-action settlements that have been
procured without a judge's ever having ruled that these cases are
even worthy of class treatment, let alone meritorious."
Plaintiffs' lawyers were able to keep Miller County a class action
magnet following CAFA by inserting into each complaint a
"stipulation" that the class members would not seek more than $5
million dollars, the threshold amount needed for federal courts to
have jurisdiction under the federal law.
The Supreme Court held that plaintiffs' lawyers cannot avoid CAFA
through such manipulation. Writing for the Court, Justice Stephen
Breyer held that to find otherwise would "exalt form over
substance, and run directly counter to CAFA's primary objective:
ensuring 'Federal court consideration of interstate cases of
national importance.'" He went on to observe that allowing the
plaintiff to stipulate to damages below the jurisdictional level
would "have the effect of allowing the subdivision of a $100
million action into 21 just-below-$5-million state-court actions."
This is exactly the type of gerrymandering plaintiffs are engaged
in with the 100-plaintiff limit, and courts should put a stop to
it.
* NERA Records 100 Securities Class Action Settlements in 2013
--------------------------------------------------------------
More securities class actions were filed in US federal court in
2013 compared to 2012 but the increase has been a small one,
according to Recent Trends in Securities Class Action Litigation:
2013 Full-Year Review, an annual report released by NERA Economic
Consulting.
In 2013, 234 securities class actions were filed, compared to 213
class actions filed in 2012, representing a 10% increase and a
slight increase compared to the 224 average number of filings in
the period of 2008 to 2012.
Filings of securities class actions involving alleged violations
of Rule 10b-5, Section 11, or Section 12, saw a 15% increase over
2012, thereby exceeding the filings in any year in the 2009 to
2012 period. Filings in the 5th Circuit alleging violation of
Rule 10b-5 more than doubled in 2013 to 13, compared to six
filings in 2012 and five in 2011.
The number of class actions settled in 2012 came close to the
record low of 2012. Only 100 securities class actions were
settled in 2013, compared to 94 settlements reached in 2012 and
the 127 average settlements per year in the period of 1996 to
2011.
Average settlement amounts for "usual" securities class actions in
2013 broke prior records, reaching $55 million, an increase of 53%
over 2012 and a 31% increase over the previous high in 2009. (By
"usual," we mean excluding settlements over $1 billion, merge
objection settlements, and IPO laddering settlements.) The median
settlement amount for 2013 was $9.1 million, a 26% decrease
compared to 2012.
"Large settlements got larger, while small settlements got smaller
in 2013," said report co-author Dr. Renzo Comolli. "Nine
securities class action settlements last year passed the $100
million mark, driving the average settlement amount to its record
high. In addition, numerous small settlements occurred in 2013,
substantially driving down median settlement values."
NERA Securities Class Action Trends Report Series
NERA has been analyzing trends in securities class actions for
more than 20 years. This year-end study, Recent Trends in
Securities Class Action Litigation: 2013 Full-Year Review, is
co-authored by NERA Senior Consultants Dr. Renzo Comolli and
Svetlana Starykh. In addition to the trends discussed above, the
2013 version reviews: timing of filings in relation to recent
Supreme Court decisions; number of filings by issuer's country of
domicile, by circuit, and by sector; outcomes on motions to
dismiss and motions for class certification; time to resolution;
dismissal rates; attorneys' fees and other characteristics of
securities class actions.
*********
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. Noemi Irene A.
Adala, Joy A. Agravante, Valerie Udtuhan, Julie Anne L. Toledo,
Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.
Copyright 2014. 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 or Nina Novak at 202-241-8200.
* * * End of Transmission * * *