/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/190920.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Friday, September 20, 2019, Vol. 21, No. 189 Headlines A & L HOME: Reynolds Seeks OT Pay for Home Health Care Providers ADECCO, INC: Risher Sues over Unsolicited Text Message Calls AFNI INC: Rodriguez Files FDCPA Suit in M.D. Florida ALLTRAN FINANCIAL: Lee Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York AMERICAN ACOUNTS: Kurkowski Files FDCPA Suit in W.D. Wisconsin AMERICAN DENTAL: Jairam Sues Over Unsolicited Marketing APJ CONTRACTING: Santos et al Seek OT Pay for Construction Workers APPLE INC: Bartling Appeals N.D. California Ruling to 9th Circuit ARIZONA BEVERAGES: Kiler Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York ASTRAZENECA PHARMA: Sued over Price Fixing of Seroquel XR Drug ATLANTIC CREDIT: Strouse Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York BAKER HUGHES OILFIELD: Hockinson Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Calif. BIG BANG ENTERPRISES: Freeman Suit to Recover Unpaid Overtime BLUE COLLAR: Floyd Files Suit Over Unsolicited Facsimile Ads CARDINAL GLASS: Long Sues Over Missed Breaks, Missing Wages CBC RESTAURANT: Pardue Moves for Certification of Five Classes CITIZENS ARTS CLUB: Marcusse Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages COMMONWEALTH FINANCIAL: Napoles Files FDCPA Suit in S.D. Florida CONNECTICUT: Class of Inmates w/ HCV in Barfield ADA Suit Certified DAVITA INC: Perry Suit Asserts Harassment, Invasion of Privacy DIAL 7: Satine Sues over New Jersey Rides Tolls Charges DIEBOLD NIXDORF: Livonia Fund Hits Share Drop from Merger Mishap FLORIDA PET RETAILERS: Fenwick Sues Over Unsolicited Telemarketing FORD MOTOR: Fencl Sues Over Erroneous Fuel Economy Ratings GENERAL MOTORS: Burgeson Sues Over Defective Engine System GOKUL RX LLC: Katz Suit Asserts TCPA Violation Over Fax Ads HEARST MAGAZINE: Sued Over Auto-Renewal of Service Subscriptions HILLSTONE HEALTHCARE: Hudson, et al. Seek Reinstatement of Benefits IBEAT INC: Broward Psychology Sues Over Unsolicited Fax Ads ILLINOIS: Donovan Sues DOH Over Medicaid Act Breach INDOCHINO APPAREL: Borg Hits Illegal Telemarketing SMS Ads JEFFERSON CAPITAL: Kim Files FDCPA Suit in New Jersey JPMORGAN CHASE: Leitzke Suit Transferred to M.D. Florida JUUL LABS: Foss Disputes e-Cigarette Products' Safety KING CREDIT: Fields Suit Asserts FCRA Breach L.V. & L. RESORT: Murphy Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York LYFT INC: Toscano Sues Over Share Price Drop MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL: Hall Sues Over Deceptive Hotel Room Pricing MIDWEST TITLE: Sent Doyle Illegal Automated Collection Text Msgs. MILO CAFE: Shaba Seeks Overtime Pay for Restaurant Staff MONARCH RECOVERY: Bail Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York MONDELEZ GLOBAL: Walters Seeks Unpaid Wages & OT for Merchandisers MSG NETWORKS: Gould Sues BOD for Breaches of Fiduciary Duty NATURAL ESSENTIALS: Diaz Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT: Hawkins Sues Over TCPA Violation NEKTAR THERAPEUTICS: Damiba Hits Share Price Drop NORTH BEACH TAVERN: Santana Seeks OT Pay for Restaurant Staff PAINFUL PLEASURES: Diaz Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York PATENAUDE & FELIX: Haney Files FDCPA Suit in N.D. California PIE KINGZ: Shell Seeks Minimum Wages for Delivery Drivers PROCTER & GAMBLE: Slade Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York RADIUS GLOBAL: Robinson Files FDCPA Suit in New Jersey RBL LLC: Faces Matzura ADA Suit in New York RCI HOSPITALITY: Hernandez Hits Unpaid Wages, Misclassification REAL VALUE PRODUCTS: Camp Drug Store Hits Illegally-faxed Ads RESOURCE MARKETING: Loftus Suit Transferred to New York Dist. Ct. ROCKWALL SPORTS: Smith Seeks Overtime Pay for Employees SAPPHIRE NURSING: Schmidt Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct. SCHINDLER ELEVATOR: Foster Suit Removed to N.D. California SELECTBLINDS LLC: Diaz Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York SHOE SHOW: Gray Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages SKINIT ACQUISITION: Diaz Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York SLACK TECHNOLOGIES: Chardonnet Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. SOUTHWOODS RV RESORT: Matzura Sues Over ADA Violation STAMPS.COM: Website not Accessible to Blind People, Diaz Says STREAMSIDE RV PARK: Matzura Suit Asserts ADA Breach SUPERIOR MEDICAL: Howell Hits Time-shaving, Unpaid Overtime Pay T.L. CANNON MANAGEMENT: Ferguson Suit Asserts ADA Breach TACOMBI HOLDING: Fischler Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York TEXTRON INC: Pension Fund Sues over 11% Drop in Share Price THEVEGASPACKAGE.COM INC: Fisher Suit Asserts TCPA Breach TITAN STAIRS & TRIM: Paul Files FLSA Suit in Utah TITLEMAX: Dougherty Files Suit Over Excessive Interest Rates TOP FLITE: Fabricant Sues Over Illegal Telemarketing Calls TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS: Clark Sues over Debt Collection Practices TRINITY PROPERTIES: Fails to Pay Minimum and OT Wages, Brown Says UNITED STATES: Gatore's Class Cert. Bid Denied; Hearing on Oct. 11 UNIV 45: Leon et al Seek Unpaid Wages & OT for Market Employees VILLAGE NATURAL: Hernandez Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages WESTAT INC: Villamont Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. Asbestos Litigation ASBESTOS UPDATE: 6,335 Bendix Claims Still Pending at June 30 ASBESTOS UPDATE: BNSF Accrues $308MM for PI Matters at June 30 ASBESTOS UPDATE: CECONY Accrues $7MM Liability at June 30 ASBESTOS UPDATE: Con Edison Accrues $8MM Liability at June 30 ASBESTOS UPDATE: Cox Suit Placed Under Mediation ASBESTOS UPDATE: Crane Co. Had 28,851 Pending Claims at June 30 ASBESTOS UPDATE: Curtiss-Wright Still Defends Suits at June 30 ASBESTOS UPDATE: Diamond Offshore Still Faces Suits at June 30 ASBESTOS UPDATE: Harsco Corp. Had 17,131 PI Suits at June 30 ASBESTOS UPDATE: ITT Still Obliged to Indemnify Xylem at June 30 ASBESTOS UPDATE: J&J Talc Bottle Contained Asbestos, Expert Says ASBESTOS UPDATE: Magnetek Has $864,000 Liability at June 30 ASBESTOS UPDATE: Navistar Continues to Defend Claims at July 31 ASBESTOS UPDATE: Owens-Illinois Defends 1,020 Suits at June 30 ASBESTOS UPDATE: Rexnord Corp. Still Faces Stearns PI Lawsuits ASBESTOS UPDATE: Rogers Corp. Had $70.8MM Liabilities at June 30 ASBESTOS UPDATE: Roper Tech, Units Still Defend Suits at June 30 ASBESTOS UPDATE: SPX Had $556.7MM Asbestos Liability at June 29 ********* A & L HOME: Reynolds Seeks OT Pay for Home Health Care Providers ---------------------------------------------------------------- RACHEL REYNOLDS on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. A & L HOME CARE AND TRAINING CENTER, LLC., NILA IRBY, DAWNETTA ABBETT, and RUTHIE LUCAS, the Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-00735-MRB (S.D. Ohio, Sept. 5, 2019), challenges policies and practices of Defendants that violate the Fair Labor Standards Act and Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act concerning underpayment of overtime to Plaintiff and others similarly situated. The Plaintiff and others similarly situated were jointly employed by Defendants as nonexempt home health care providers. They were required to travel to and from more than one work location within the same work day, but were not paid for this drive time. The Plaintiff and others similarly situated regularly worked more than 40 hours in a workweek. Defendants' failure to pay drive time resulted in overtime violations, the lawsuit says.[BN] Counsel for the Plaintiff are: Shannon M. Draher, Esq. Hans A. Nilges, Esq NILGES DRAHER LLC 7266 Portage Street, N.W., Suite D Massillon, OH 44646 Telephone: (330) 470-4428 Facsimile: (330) 754-1430 E-mail: sdraher@ohlaborlaw.com hans@ohlaborlaw.com - and - Christopher J. Lalak, Esq. NILGES DRAHER LLC 614 W. Superior Ave., Suite 1148 Cleveland, OH 44113 Telephone: (216) 230-2955 E-mail: clalak@ohlaborlaw.com ADECCO, INC: Risher Sues over Unsolicited Text Message Calls ------------------------------------------------------------ CLARENCE RISHER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. ADECCO, INC., a Delaware corporation, and MYA SYSTEMS, INC., a Delaware corporation, that Defendants, Case No. 3:19-cv-05602-JCS (N.D. Cal. Sept. 5, 2019), contends that the Defendant promotes and markets its merchandise, in part, by sending unsolicited text messages to wireless phone users, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. In order to advertise the availability of its staffing services, Adecco partnered with an artificial intelligence company named Mya. Mya is a chat bot that uses machine learning and natural language to communicate with prospective clients on a variety of platforms, including by text message. However, Adecco leveraged the Mya chat bot to advertise its job placement services by sending unsolicited text messages to consumers' cell phones in violation of the TCPA. Adecco is a global staffing and job placement service that, for a fee, helps individuals find employment in various industries.[BN] Counsel for Plaintiff and the Putative Class are: Rafey Balabanian, Esq. Lily Hough, Esq. Aaron Lawson, Esq. EDELSON PC 123 Townsend Street, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94107 Telephone: 415 212 9300 Facsimile: 415 373 9435 E-mail: rbalabanian@edelson.com hough@edelson.com alawson@edelson.com AFNI INC: Rodriguez Files FDCPA Suit in M.D. Florida ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Afni, Inc. The case is styled as Lourdes Rodriguez individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Afni, Inc., John Does 1-25, Defendants, Case No. 6:19-cv-01786-RBD-EJK (M.D. Fla., Sept. 13, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Afni, Inc. provides financial and commercial services. The Company develops customized solutions for companies to increase revenue and build customer relationships, as well as offers contact center and receivables management solutions to large companies.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Justin E. Zeig, Esq. Zeig Law Firm, LLC 3475 Sheridan Street, Suite 310 Hollywood, FL 33024 Phone & Fax: (754) 217-3084 Email: justin@zeiglawfirm.com ALLTRAN FINANCIAL: Lee Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Alltran Financial LP. The case is styled as Keun Hyung Lee individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Alltran Financial LP, LVNV Funding LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-05211 (E.D. N.Y., Sept. 12, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Alltran Financial, LP specializes in revenue cycle, accounts receivable, and contact center solutions within healthcare, financial services, higher education, and government industries in the Unites States.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David M. Barshay, Esq. Craig B. Sanders, Esq. Barshay Sanders, PLLC 100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500 Garden City, NY 11530 Phone: (516) 203-7600 Fax: (516) 281-7601 Email: dbarshay@barshaysanders.com csanders@barshaysanders.com AMERICAN ACOUNTS: Kurkowski Files FDCPA Suit in W.D. Wisconsin -------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against American Accounts & Advisers, Inc. The case is styled as Josie Kurkowski individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. American Accounts & Advisers, Inc., John Does 1-25, Defendants, Case No. 3:19-cv-00766 (W.D. Wis., Sept. 13, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. American Accounts & Advisors Inc. was founded in 1985. The company's line of business includes collection and adjustment services on claims and other insurance related issues.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Yaakov Saks, Esq. Stein Saks, PLLC 285 Passaic Street Hackensack, NJ 07601 Phone: (201) 282-6500 ext 101 Fax: (201) 282-6501 Email: ysaks@steinsakslegal.com AMERICAN DENTAL: Jairam Sues Over Unsolicited Marketing ------------------------------------------------------- SHANTEL JAIRAM, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. AMERICAN DENTAL OF FLORIDA-FORT LAUDERDALE, LLC, d/b/a SMILE DESIGN DENTAL OF FORT LAUDERDALE, Defendant, Case No. 0:19-cv-62238-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Sept. 6, 2019) is a putative class action under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, arising from Defendant's violations of the TCPA. In an effort to drum-up business, Defendant engages in unsolicited marketing with no regard for privacy rights of the recipients of those messages, asserts the complaint. The Defendant caused thousands of unsolicited text messages and phone calls to be sent to the cellular telephones of Plaintiff and class members, causing them injuries, including invasion of their privacy, aggravation, annoyance, intrusion on seclusion, trespass, and conversion. Through this action, Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to halt Defendant's illegal conduct. Plaintiff also seeks statutory damages on behalf of Plaintiff and class members, and any other available legal or equitable remedies resulting from the illegal actions of Defendant. Plaintiff is a natural person and is a resident of Broward County, Florida. Defendant is a dental practice which offers routine and cosmetic dental procedures to consumers.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: JIBRAEL S. HINDI, ESQ. THOMAS J. PATTI, ESQ. The Law Offices of Jibrael S. Hindi 110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-907-1136 Fax: 855-529-9540 Email: jibrael@jibraellaw.com tom@jibraellaw.com APJ CONTRACTING: Santos et al Seek OT Pay for Construction Workers ------------------------------------------------------------------ CRISTIAN RODRIGUEZ, JOSE SANTOS, HENRY NAVARRO GUERRA, RIGOBERTO RIVAS, JUAN ROMERO, EDGAR ALVARENGA, OSCAR GONZALEZ, YOINER TORRES, LUIS RODRIGUEZ, MISRAIM TAXILAGA, JOSE GILBERTO LINARES, RONALD DELGADO, XAVIER ANIBAL BOHORQUEZ, CARLOS SANTOS, SANTIAGO BARRAGAN, ERLIN SOLIS, and ODLIVER PALACIOS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. APJ CONTRACTING, INC. and ANTHONY ISOLA, as an individual, the Defendants, Case No. 2:19-cv-05057-LDH-JO (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 5 2019), seeks to recover damages for Defendants' violations of federal and state overtime wage and minimum wage laws arising out of Plaintiffs' employment at APJ Contracting, Inc. The Plaintiffs are former employees of Defendants, who were employed during the relevant statutory period as non-exempt laborers, carpenters, construction workers, concrete workers, rebar workers, and in other positions performing other miscellaneous tasks.[BN] Attorneys for the Plaintiffs are: Roman Avshalumov, Esq. HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, P.C. Kew Gardens, NY 11415 80-02 Kew Gardens Road APPLE INC: Bartling Appeals N.D. California Ruling to 9th Circuit ----------------------------------------------------------------- Plaintiffs Anthony Bartling, et al., filed an appeal from a Court ruling in their consolidated lawsuit entitled In re: APPLE PROCESSOR LITIGATION, Case Nos. 5:18-cv-00147-EJD and 5:18-cv-00271-EJD, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose. The appellate case is captioned as ANTHONY BARTLING; JACQUELINE N. OLSON; ROBERT GIRALDI; JENNIFER ABRAMS, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs-Appellants v. APPLE INC., Defendant-Appellee, Case No. 19-16720, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, Judge Edward J. Davila granted the Defendant's motion to dismiss all claims alleged in the Plaintiffs' Consolidated Amended Complaint with leave to amend for the Plaintiffs' failure to allege Article III standing. In 2017, independent security researchers discovered an industry-wide computer security vulnerability known as Spectre and Meltdown that directly affected Apple's own processors within devices such as iPhones, iPads, iPods, and the Apple TV. In the putative class action, Abrams and others similarly situated are purchasers of such iDevices and allege that Apple's mitigation efforts to patch the vulnerability within the iDevices substantially slowed its processors, bringing a degradation in value and damage to their property. Federal subject matter jurisdiction is based upon the Plaintiffs' claim under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and the Class Action Fairness Act. Plaintiffs Abrams, Anthony Bartling, Robert Giraldi, and Jacqueline Olson purchased iDevices such as the iPad Pro, iPhone SE, iPhone 6s Plus, iPhone 7, and iPhone 8 in recent years. The Plaintiffs allege these two security vulnerabilities constitute design defects in the Defendant's processors for iDevices. In June of 2017, Google's Project Zero disclosed the findings to ARM Holdings PLC, a company that licenses central processing unit architecture to several large companies. ARM Holdings in turn notified its licensees, including the Defendant, of the Defects. The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case is set as follows: -- October 3, 2019 -- Transcript shall be ordered; -- November 4, 2019 -- Transcript shall be filed by court reporter; -- December 12, 2019 -- Appellant's opening brief and excerpts of record shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 31 and 9th Cir. R. 31-2.1; -- January 13, 2020 -- Appellee's answering brief and excerpts of record shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 31 and 9th Cir. R. 31-2.1; and -- The optional appellant's reply brief shall be filed and served within 21 days of service of the appellee's brief, pursuant to FRAP 31 and 9th Cir. R. 31-2.1.[BN] ARIZONA BEVERAGES: Kiler Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Arizona Beverages USA LLC. The case is styled as Marion Kiler Individually and as the representative of a class of similarly situated persons, Plaintiff v. Arizona Beverages USA LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-05223 (E.D. N.Y., Sept. 12, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Arizona Beverages USA is an American producer of many flavors of iced tea, juice cocktails, and energy drinks based in Woodbury, New York.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Dan Shaked, Esq. Shaked Law Group, P.C. 44 Court Street, Suite 1217 Brooklyn, NY 11217 Phone: (917) 373-9128 Fax: (718) 504-7555 Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com ASTRAZENECA PHARMA: Sued over Price Fixing of Seroquel XR Drug -------------------------------------------------------------- LAW ENFORCEMENT HEALTH BENEFITS INC., on behalf of itself and all those similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. ASTRAZENECA PHARMACEUTICALS L.P.; ASTRAZENECA L.P.; ASTRAZENECA UK LIMITED; HANDA PHARMACEUTICALS, LLC; PAR PHARMACEUTICAL, INC., and ACCORD PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., the Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-08296 (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 5, 2019), alleges that Defendants violated the state antitrust and consumer protection laws concerning the pharmaceutical drug Seroquel XR (quetiapine fumarate extended-release tablets). The Defendants violated state antitrust and consumer protection laws, by entering into the anticompetitive agreements that allocated markets, restricted output, and improperly maintained AstraZeneca’s market and monopoly power by (1) delaying competition from lower-priced generic Seroquel XR that would have entered the market earlier; (2) delaying competition from authorized generic Seroquel XR that would have entered the market earlier; and (3) fixing, raising, and maintaining the prices of Seroquel XR and its generic equivalents at supra-competitive levels. The U.S. sales for branded Seroquel XR exceeded $1 billion annually for AstraZeneca prior to the introduction of generic competition. Handa/Par and Accord recognized the huge market potential for competing generic versions of Seroquel XR and each filed an abbreviated new drug application with the FDA seeking approval to market different strengths of generic Seroquel XR. In response to the threat of generic competition, AstraZeneca filed separate patent litigation against Handa/Par and Accord alleging that their purported generic versions of Seroquel XR infringed upon AstraZeneca’s patents over the drug. Rather than risk losing the patent litigations and allowing generic versions of Seroquel XR to reach the market, AstraZeneca induced Handa/Par and Accord to each settle their respective patent litigation by entering into anticompetitive agreements whereby (1) Handa/Par 1 and Accord agreed not to compete in the market for Seroquel XR from approximately September 29, 2011 until November 1, 2016, thereby allocating the entire Seroquel XR market to AstraZeneca during this roughly 5 year period; (2) AstraZeneca agreed not to compete in the generic Seroquel XR market from roughly November 1, 2016 until May 1, 2017 thereby allocating the entire market for generic versions of Seroquel XR to Handa/Par and Accord for this six month period; and (3) AstraZeneca made a large unjustified reverse payment-- i.e., payments from the patent holder, AstraZeneca, to the alleged infringers, Handa/Par and Accord, and Defendants had no procompetitive justification or other legitimate explanation for the payments. AstraZeneca manufactures, fabricates, and processes drugs in pharmaceutical preparations. The Company focuses on several therapeutic areas such as cardiovascular and metabolic, gastrointestinal, neuroscience, oncology, respiratory, and infection.[BN] Counsel for Plaintiff and the Proposed End Payor Class are: Robert G. Eisler, Esq. Deborah A. Elman, Esq. Chad B. Eloltzman, Esq. Julia McGrath, Esq. GRANT & EISENHOFER P.A. 485 Lexington Avenue, 29th Floor New York, NY Telephone: (646) 722-8500 Facsimile: (646) 722-8501 E-mail: reisler@gelaw.com delman@gelaw.com choltzman@gelaw.com jmcgrath@gelaw.com ATLANTIC CREDIT: Strouse Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Atlantic Credit & Finance Inc. The case is styled as James W Strouse individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Atlantic Credit & Finance Inc., Defendant, Case No. 2:19-cv-05228-JS-AKT (E.D. N.Y., Sept. 12, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Atlantic Credit & Finance, Inc. provides financial services. The Company offers unsecured and consumer distressed assets, as well as collection and management services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Craig B. Sanders, Esq. David M. Barshay, Esq. Barshay Sanders, PLLC 100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500 Garden City, NY 11530 Phone: (516) 203-7600 Fax: (516) 281-7601 Email: csanders@barshaysanders.com dbarshay@barshaysanders.com BAKER HUGHES OILFIELD: Hockinson Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Calif. ------------------------------------------------------------------ The case captioned RICHARD HOCKISON, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated current and former employees; Plaintiff, v. BAKER HUGHES OILFIELD OPERATIONS, INC. and BAKER HUGHES OILFIELD OPERATIONS, LLC; Defendants, Case No. 18CV00856 was removed from the Superior Court for the County of Santa Barbara to the United States District Court for the Central District of California on Sept. 13, 2019, and assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-07949. The Complaint alleges causes of action under California state law for (1) failure to pay California overtime and double-time premium wages, (2) failure to provide lawful meal and rest periods, (3) unfair competition, (4) failure to pay wages due at termination, and (5) pay stub violations.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: M. Brett Burns, Esq. HUNTON ANDREWS KURTH LLP 50 California Street, Suite 1700 San Francisco, CA 94111 Phone: 415-975-3700 Facsimile: 415-975-3701 Email: mbrettburns@HuntonAK.com BIG BANG ENTERPRISES: Freeman Suit to Recover Unpaid Overtime ------------------------------------------------------------- Deleshia Freeman, on her own behalf and on behalf of those similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Big Bang Enterprises, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 19-cv-00123, (M.D. Fla., August 19, 2019), seeks to recover unpaid minimum wage compensation, liquidated damages and other relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Big Bang Enterprises owns and operates "The Retail Outsource," a store selling wireless, celular devices and other services. Freeman worked as a "Wireless Sales Representative" for their location in Orlando, Florida. Freeman claims to have worked in excess of forty hours per work week during one or more work weeks but was not paid overtime compensation [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Carlos Leach, Esq. Bobby A. Lean, Jr., Esq. THE LEACH FIRM, P.A. 1950 Lee Rd., Suite 213 Winter Park, FL 32789 Telephone: (407) 574-4999 Facsimile: (833) 423-5864 Email: CLeach@theleachfirm.com BLUE COLLAR: Floyd Files Suit Over Unsolicited Facsimile Ads ------------------------------------------------------------ LOUIS FLOYD on behalf of himself and others similarly situated Plaintiff, v. BLUE COLLAR PEOS and TREVOR DOYLE, Defendants, Case No. 0:19-cv-02433 (D. Minn., Sept. 5, 2019) is an action brought to enforce the consumer privacy provisions of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, a federal statute enacted in 1991 in response to widespread public outrage about the proliferation of intrusive, nuisance telemarketing practices. In violation of the TCPA, the Defendants sent unsolicited facsimile advertisements promoting construction insurance services to putative class members, including the Mr. Floyd. Because telemarketing campaigns generally place calls to hundreds of thousands or even millions of potential customers en masse, Mr. Floyd brings this action on behalf of a proposed nationwide class of other persons who received illegal telemarketing calls from or on behalf of Defendants, says the complaint. Plaintiff is a natural person residing in California. Defendants' business is construction insurance services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Anthony I. Paronich, Esq. Paronich Law, P.C. 350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400 Hingham, MA 02043 Phone: (508) 221-1510 Email: anthony@paronichlaw.com - and - Andrew W. Heidarpour, Esq. HEIDARPOUR LAW FIRM, PLLC 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, 190-318 Washington, DC 20004 Phone: (202) 234-2727 Email: aheidarpour@hlfirm.com CARDINAL GLASS: Long Sues Over Missed Breaks, Missing Wages ----------------------------------------------------------- RONALD LONG, on behalf of himself, all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. CARDINAL GLASS INDUSTRIES, INC., a Minnesota corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 19CV354414 (Cal. Super. Ct., Santa Clara Cty., Sept. 9, 2019) is a class and representative action to recover unpaid wages, restitution and related relief. Plaintiff brings this class and representative action against Defendants for alleged violations of the Labor Code and Business and Professions Code. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants have failed to provide him and all other similarly situated individuals with meal periods; failed to provide them with rest periods; failed to pay them premium wages for missed meal and/or rest periods; failed to pay them at least minimum wage for all hours worked; failed to provide them with accurate written wage statements; and failed to pay them all of their final wages following separation of employment. As a result of Defendants' policy, Plaintiff and the putative class were regularly not provided with uninterrupted meal periods of at least 30 minutes for each 5 hours worked because Plaintiff and the putative class' meal periods were constantly interrupted to complete work related tasks. Also, as a result of Defendants' policy, Plaintiff and the putative class were regularly not provided with uninterrupted rest periods of at least 10 minutes for each 4 hours worked because Plaintiff and the putative class were continuously repairing equipment that broke down, says the complaint. Plaintiff worked for Defendants as a non-exempt, hourly employee from approximately July 2001 through March 2018. CARDINAL GLASS INDUSTRIES, INC. is a Minnesota corporation doing business in the State of California.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Shaun Setareh, Esq. William M. Pao, Esq. Alexandra R Mclntosh, Esq. SETAREH LAW GROUP 315 South Beverly Drive, Suite 315 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Phone (310) 888-7771 Facsimile (310) 888-0109 Email: shaun@setarehlaw.com william@setarehlaw.com alex@setarehlaw.com CBC RESTAURANT: Pardue Moves for Certification of Five Classes -------------------------------------------------------------- The Plaintiffs in the lawsuit styled AMBER PARDUE and JENNIFER VARGAS, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. CBC RESTAURANT CORP, a Delaware Corporation; JULIANA ZHU, an individual; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. 2:19-cv-03920-R-SK (C.D. Cal.), ask the Court to certify proposed classes defined as: * Class 1 (Non-Exempt Class - Rancho Cucamonga Location): All current and former employees of Corner Bakery within the State of California that worked at or from the Rancho Cucamonga Location at any time commencing four (4) years preceding the filing of Plaintiffs' original complaint in Los Angeles Superior Court on February 7, 2014 ("Filing Date") up until the time that notice of the class action is provided to the class; * Class 2 (Meal Period Class - Rancho Cucamonga Location): All current and former employees of Corner Bakery within the State of California working at or from the Rancho Cucamonga Location at any time commencing four (4) years preceding the Filing Date up until the time that notice of the class action is provided to the class who worked shifts of five (5) hours or more; * Class 3 (Rest Period Class - Rancho Cucamonga Location): All current and former employees of Corner Bakery within the State of California working at or from the Rancho Cucamonga Location at any time commencing four (4) years preceding the Filing Date up until the time that notice of the class action is provided to the class, who worked shifts of three and-a-half (3.5) hours or more; * Class 4 (Late Pay Class - Rancho Cucamonga Location): All former employees of Corner Bakery within the State of California working at or from the Rancho Cucamonga Location at any time commencing three (3) years preceding the Filing Date up until the time that notice of the class action is provided to the class, who did not receive all their due wages upon termination and/or resignation of their employment; and * Class 5 (Wage Statement Class - Rancho Cucamonga Location): All current and former employees of Corner Bakery within the State of California working at or from the Rancho Cucamonga Location to whom, at any time commencing one (1) year preceding the Filing Date until the time that notice of the class action is provided to the class, were provided with wage statements. The Plaintiffs also ask the Court to exercise its discretion, if it is not inclined to grant certification to Class 1 and/or any of the other classes, to define the proposed classes in a manner it believes is more suitable for class treatment, pursuant to Rule 23(c)(1)(B) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court will commence a hearing on October 7, 2019, at 10:00 a.m., to consider the Motion.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: David D. Bibiyan, Esq. Diego Aviles, Esq. BIBIYAN LAW GROUP, P.C. 1801 Century Park East, Suite 2600 Los Angeles, CA Telephone: (310) 438-5555 Facsimile: (310) 300-1705 E-mail: david@tomorrowlaw.com diego@tomorrowlaw.com Defendants CBC RESTAURANT CORP. and JULIANA ZHU are represented by: Luanne Sacks, Esq. SACKS, RICKETTS & CASE LLP 177 Post Street, Suite 650 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: (415) 549-0581 E-mail: lsacks@srclaw.com - and - Hope Anne Case, Esq. Jennifer M. Holly, Esq. Elaisha Nandrajog, Esq. SACKS, RICKETTS & CASE LLP 1900 Embarcadero Road, Suite 111 Palo Alto, CA 94303 Telephone: (650) 494-4098 E-mail: hcase@srclaw.com jholly@srclaw.com enandrajog@srclaw.com CITIZENS ARTS CLUB: Marcusse Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages ---------------------------------------------------------- DILLON MARCUSSE; EDWARD MISKIE; PHILIP PORTOLANO; and ADAM SPERANDIO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. CITIZENS ARTS CLUB, INC. d/b/a/ NORWOOD; ALAN LINN, individually and as an Officer, Director, and/or Principal of NORWOOD; and CAMILLE PARSON, individually and as an Officer, Director, and/or Principal of NORWOOD, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-08379 (S.D. N.Y., Sept. 9, 2019) is a putative collective and class action brought by Plaintiffs challenging acts committed by Defendants against Plaintiffs and those similarly situated, which amount to violations of federal and state wage and hour laws. Plaintiffs were employed by Defendants as Bartenders, Servers, Bar-Backs who provided food and drink services for Defendants' customers and as Front Desk Employees who provided telephone answering services for Defendants and checked guests in and out of Defendant Norwood's facility. Plaintiffs, during the past 3 years through the final date of the disposition of this action, were not paid the statutorily required rate of one and a half times their hourly rate for all hours worked in excess of 40 per workweek and are entitled to recover: (i) unpaid and incorrectly paid wages; (ii) unpaid overtime wages; (iii) liquidated damages; (iv) interest; (v) attorneys' fees and costs; and (vii) such other and further relief as the Court finds necessary and proper, says the complaint. Defendant Norwood is a traditional gentlemen's club located in New York, New York that provided food and drink services to its members and non-members.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: James A. Vagnini, Esq. Alexander M. White, Esq. Valli Kane & Vagnini LLP 600 Old Country Road, Suite 519 Garden City, NY 11530 Phone: (516) 203-7180 Facsimile: (516) 706-0248 Email: jvagnini@vkvlawyers.com awhite@vkvlawyers.com COMMONWEALTH FINANCIAL: Napoles Files FDCPA Suit in S.D. Florida ---------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Commonwealth Financial Systems, Inc. The case is styled as Nelsa Napoles individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Commonwealth Financial Systems, Inc., Pendrick Capital Partners II LLC, John Does 1-25, Defendants, Case No. 0:19-cv-62284-RS (S.D. Fla., Sept. 13, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Commonwealth Financial Systems, Inc. provides financial services. The Company offers first party outsourcing, check collection, skip tracing, billing services, and debt purchasing services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Justin E. Zeig, Esq. Zeig Law Firm, LLC 3595 Sheridan Street, Suite 103 Hollywood, FL 33021 Phone: (754) 217-3084 Email: justin@zeiglawfirm.com CONNECTICUT: Class of Inmates w/ HCV in Barfield ADA Suit Certified ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the case, ROBERT BARFIELD, ET AL, Plaintiffs, v. ROLLIN COOK in his official capacity as Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Correction, Defendant, Case No. 3:18-cv-1198 (MPS) (D. Conn.), Judge Michael P. Shea of the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut granted the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification. The Plaintiffs bring the putative class action lawsuit regarding medical care for incarcerated people infected with Hepatitis C against Cook in his official capacity as Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Correction ("CT DOC"). In 1997, CT DOC and the University of Connecticut Health Center ("UCHC") entered into a Memorandum of Agreement ("MOA") for the provision of health care to offenders through Correctional Managed Health Care ("CMHC"). This MOA remained in place until July 1, 2018, when Semple terminated the relationship between DOC and UCHC and brought all health care functions "in house, to be controlled specifically by the DOC." It provided that CMHC would implement clinical practice guidelines and Medicaid guidelines. CMHC's policy governing the treatment of prisoners with HCV ("Policy G 2.04") was promulgated on Dec. 10, 2002, and revised on May 30, 2005, Dec. 21, 2010, Feb. 1, 2012, July 31, 2013, June 30, 2015, and June 30, 2016. The policy created a special board of infectious disease experts who evaluate all requests for treatment of the Hepatitis C infection in CT DOC facilities. It also created a Hepatitis C Utilization Review Board ("HepCURB") to review all requests for treatment. The policy details the steps that physicians and the HepCURB should take when working with patients who have HCV. Policy G 2.04 provides that, "in general," HepCURB will follow the specific recommendations of the AASLD and IDSA, which both recommend immediate treatment with DAAs for all people with chronic HCV; at the same time, the policy states that they will not directly provide specific anti-viral drugs for Hepatitis C. CT DOC did not release any new guidelines for HCV treatment following the July 1, 2018 decision by Semple to change the management of health care services for DOC inmates. The Plaintiffs allege that prioritization for the DAA treatment as stated in Policy G 2.04, which places advanced HCV cases of hepatic fibrosis and liver transplant candidates at the top of the line is not in line with the standard of care as delaying treatment until a patient is extremely sick has the perverse effect of withholding treatment from the patients who could benefit from it most, because the treatment is less effective for patients with the most advanced stages of the disease. They allege that even if the policy was adequate, CT DOC does not follow the policy and, in practice, delays treatment for virtually all prisoners with HCV (regardless of disease progression) until the prisoner is released from prison or dies. The Plaintiffs further allege that the policy does not address liver transplantation, the only cure for people with decompensated cirrhosis, and does not address the need for liver cancer screening, "which is standard medical practice once individuals have progressed to advanced fibrosis or cirrhosis." Following the Court's ruling on the Motion to Dismiss, the only claim remaining is the Plaintiffs' claim for various forms of injunctive relief against Cook in his official capacity for deliberate indifference to medical needs in violation of the Eighth Amendment under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983. The Plaintiffs seek to certify a class of all current and future prisoners in CT DOC custody who have been diagnosed, or will be diagnosed, with chronic HCV. They also seek an injunction ordering Defendant to provide routine opt-out testing for all CT DOC prisoners or otherwise identify all prisoners who are infected with chronic HCV; to properly screen, evaluate, monitor, and stage CT DOC prisoners with HCV; to modify the exclusions from HCV treatment; to immediately provide direct-acting antiviral medications to those with chronic HCV; and to provide liver transplants where appropriate. Judge Shea applies the relation back doctrine and rejects the argument that Barfield's claims are moot. Thus, the three named Plaintiffs who have standing to seek DAAs -- Barfield, Knapp, and Tatem -- may serve as the class representatives seeking such relief on behalf of the class. Moreover, because Barberi has standing to seek a liver transplant, and there are no allegations or argument suggesting that the claim is moot, he is eligible to serve as a class representative seeking such relief on behalf of the class. Next, the Judge finds that failure to exhaust does not defeat claims by the putative class members at this stage of litigation. Because the Defendant does not contest that Barfield and Barberi have satisfied the PLRA's exhaustion requirement, the requirement is satisfied as to all class members. Finally, he finds that final injunctive relief respecting the class as a whole is appropriate and Galvan v. Levine does not compel denial of class certification. Accordingly, thhe Judge finds that the Plaintiffs have satisfied the requirements to certify a class under Rule 23(b)(2). For the reasons he discussed, Judge Shea granted the motion for class certification to the extent set forth in his ruling. He certified the class of ll sentenced persons (1) who have been or will be diagnosed with chronic Hepatitis C; (2) who are or will be in the custody of the Connecticut Department of Corrections; and (3) who have at least sixteen weeks remaining to serve on their sentences. Robert Barfield, John Knapp, Darnell Tatem, and Jason Barberi are appointed as the class representatives, and Attorneys Kenneth J Krayeske and DeVaughn L. Ward as the class counsel. A full-text copy of the Court's Aug. 6, 2019 Ruling is available at https://is.gd/zxwnBp from Leagle.com. Robert Barfield, Plaintiff, represented by Kenneth James Krayeske -- attorney@kenkrayeske.com -- Kenneth J. Krayeske Law Offices & DeVaughn L. Ward -- info@attyward.com -- Ward Law LLC. Scott Semple, in his official capacity As Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Correction, Defendant, represented by Steven R. Strom, Office of the Attorney General & Terrence M. O'Neill, Attorney General's Office. Rollin Cook, in his official capacity As Commissioner of the Connecticut Department of Correction, Defendant, represented by Steven R. Strom, Office of the Attorney General. DAVITA INC: Perry Suit Asserts Harassment, Invasion of Privacy --------------------------------------------------------------- CHRISTEN PERRY, BIANA FUKES, ANNA WILLMING and ROMAINE RUSNAK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. DAVITA, INC. d/b/a DAVITA DIALYSIS CENTER, SATELLITE DIALYSIS OF GLENVIEW and MICHAEL KLUSMEYER, Case No. 2019CH10253 (Ill. Cir., Cook Cty., Sept. 4, 2019), seeks relief for the alleged chronic, prolific, widespread, and pervasive invasion of privacy of women, who worked for Satellite and/or DaVita at the dialysis center located at 2601 Compass Road in Glenview, Illinois, and the grossly negligent conduct that enabled the invasion to occur. Before November 2018, Satellite owned and operated the dialysis center located at 2601 Compass Road. Since November 2018, DaVita owned and operated the dialysis center located at 2601 Compass Road. During the relevant time period, in performing their jobs, the Plaintiffs and members of the proposed Class were subjected to sexually inappropriate and offensive harassing conduct by Michael Klusmeyer that violated written policies of Satellite and DaVita, including his conduct in targeting women, who worked at the dialysis center and invading their privacy, by repeatedly placing a motion-activated camera in the women's bathroom focused on the toilet. Satellite provides kidney dialysis services through outpatient dialysis centers throughout the United States and within Cook County, Illinois. DaVita provides kidney dialysis services through outpatient dialysis centers throughout the United States and within Cook County, Illinois. The Court will commence a hearing on January 3, 2020, at 10:00 a.m.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Jeffrey R. Kulwin, Esq. KULWIN, MASCIOPINTO & KULWIN, L.L.P. 161 North Clark Street, Suite 2500 Chicago, IL 60601 Telephone: (312) 641-0300 Facsimile: (312) 855-0350 E-mail: jkulwin@kmklawllp.com - and - James B. Zouras, Esq. Ryan F. Stephan, Esq. Teresa M. Becvar, Esq. STEPHAN ZOURAS, LLP 100 North Riverside Plaza, Suite 2150 Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 233-1550 Facsimile: (312) 233-1560 E-mail: jzouras@stephanzouras.com rstephan@stephanzouras.com tbecvar@stephanzouras.com DIAL 7: Satine Sues over New Jersey Rides Tolls Charges ------------------------------------------------------- SHERRIE SATINE, individually and on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff(s), vs. DIAL 7 CAR & LIMOUSINE SERVICE INC., the Defendant, Case No. BER-L-006337-19 (N.J. Super., Sept. 5, 2019), asserts that Defendant's practice of charging customers who purchase New Jersey Rides tolls for the driver to return to New York is, among other things, an unconscionable commercial practice. The Plaintiff brings this class action individually and on behalf of a putative class of persons and entities that purchased one or more rides from Dial 7 between locations within the State of New Jersey. The rides that: (a) involve both a pick-up and drop-off of a passenger within the State of New Jersey, and (b) do not include any toll crossings into the State of New York while the passenger is in the car, are referred to as "New Jersey Rides." Plaintiff and the Class members purchased New Jersey Rides from Dial 7 based on Dial 7's representations that it provides service in New Jersey. In fact, unbeknownst to Plaintiff, Dial 7 charges customers who purchase New Jersey Rides tolls for the driver to return to New York, despite the fact that the ride itself does not include any toll crossings into New York. Had Plaintiff been aware that she would be charged a toll for Dial 7's driver to return to New York following her New Jersey Rides, she would never have used Dial 7's services. Indeed, under the circumstances, no reasonable consumer travelling between locations within New Jersey would use Dial 7's services, the lawsuit says. Dial 7 owns and operates the "oldest and largest car service in the New York City area," with a fleet of over 600 vehicles.[BN] Attorneys for the Plaintiff and the Putative Class are: Jeffrey W. Herrmann, Esq. Alex A. Pisarevsky, Esq. COHN LIFLAND PEARLMAN HERRMANN & KNOPF LLP Park 80 West - Plaza One 250 Pehle Avenue, Suite 401 Saddle Brook, NJ 07663 Telephone: (201) 845-9600 Facsimile: (201) 845-9423 DIEBOLD NIXDORF: Livonia Fund Hits Share Drop from Merger Mishap ---------------------------------------------------------------- City of Livonia Retiree Health and Disability Benefits Plan, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Diebold Nixdorf, Incorporated, Andreas W. Mattes, Christopher A. Chapman and Juergen Wunram, Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-04698 (N.D. Ohio, August 20, 2019), seeks to recover compensable damages caused by violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Diebold is an international financial and retail technology company that specializes in the sale, manufacture, installation and service of self-service transaction systems. In November 2015, Diebold entered into a merger agreement with one of its primary competitors, Germany's Wincor Nixdorf. Diebold failed to disclose that it was suffering from massive inefficiencies created by the acquisition, and that it worsened its competitive position by failing to successfully integrate the two legacy sales forces and disparate IT and inventory systems thus missing significant sales opportunities and was suffering from tens of millions of dollars in integration cost overruns. City of Livonia Retiree Health and Disability Benefits Plan purchased Diebold common stock and lost when its stock price dropped after corrective disclosures. Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph F. Murray, Esq. MURRAY MURPHY MOUL + BASIL LLP 1114 Dublin Road Columbus, OH 43215 Telephone: (614) 488-0400 Fax: (614) 488-0401 Email: murray@mmmb.com - and - Brian E. Cochran, Esq. ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101-8498 Telephone: (619) 231-1058 Fax: (619) 231-7423 Email: bcochran@rgrdlaw.com - and - Thomas Michaud, Esq. VANOVERBEKE MICHAUD & TIMMONY P.C 79 Alfred Street Detroit, MI 48201 Office phone: (313) 578-1200 Email address: tmichaud@vmtlaw.com FLORIDA PET RETAILERS: Fenwick Sues Over Unsolicited Telemarketing ------------------------------------------------------------------ JALINE FENWICK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. FLORIDA PET RETAILERS, INC. AND POOCHES OF PINES, INC. D/B/A PETLAND PEMBROKE PINES, Defendant, Case No. 0:19-cv-62239-WPD (S.D. Fla., Sept. 9, 2019) is a putative class action under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, arising from Defendant's violations of the TCPA. The complaint alleges that Defendants engage in unsolicited telemarketing directed towards prospective customers with no regard for consumers' privacy rights. The Defendants telemarketing consists of sending text messages to consumers soliciting them to purchase goods and/or services. The Defendants caused thousands of unsolicited text messages to be sent to the cellular telephones of Plaintiff and Class Members, causing them injuries, including invasion of their privacy, aggravation, annoyance, intrusion on seclusion, trespass, and conversion. Through this action, Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to halt Defendants illegal conduct. Plaintiff also seeks statutory damages on behalf of herself and Class Members, and any other available legal or equitable remedies resulting from the illegal actions of Defendants, says the complaint. Plaintiff is a natural person who was a resident of Broward County, Florida. Florida Pets owns and/or operates five pet stores throughout South Florida. Petland Pembroke Pines is a pet store which is owned and/or operated by Florida Pets.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Eisenband, Esq. EISENBAND LAW, P.A. 515 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 120 Ft. Lauderdale, Fl 33301 Phone: 954.533.4092 Email: MEisenband@Eisenbandlaw.com - and - Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq. HIRALDO P.A. 401 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954.400.4713 Email: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com FORD MOTOR: Fencl Sues Over Erroneous Fuel Economy Ratings ---------------------------------------------------------- Keith Fencl, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Ford Motor Company, Defendant, Case No. 19-cv-12438 (D. N.J., August 19, 2019), seeks redress for negligence, breach of the express warranties and for violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act. Fencl leased a new 2018 Ford F-150 from Holman Ford Maple Shade, an authorized Ford dealership and claims that Ford's fuel economy ratings were erroneous and overstated. Ford engaged in the business of designing, manufacturing, marketing, warranting, distributing, selling, and leasing automobiles. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph DePalma, Esq. Susana Cruz Hodge, Esq. Bruce D. Greenberg, Esq. LITE DEPALMA GREENBERG, LLC 570 Broad Street, Suite 1201 Newark, NJ 07102 Telephone: (973) 623-3000 E-mail: jdepalma@litedepalma.com bgreenberg@litedepalma.com scruzhodge@litedepalma.com - and - Kimberly A. Justice Jonathan M. Jagher FREED KANNER LONDON & MILLEN LLC 923 Fayette Street Conshohocken, PA 19428 Telephone: (610) 234-6487 Email: kjustice@fklmlaw.com jjagher@fklmlaw.com - and - Steven A. Kanner, Esq.7 William H. London, Esq. Brian M. Hogan, Esq. Douglas A. Millen, Esq. Michael E. Moskovitz, Esq. FREED KANNER LONDON & MILLEN, LLC 2201 Waukegan Road, Suite 130 Bannockburn, IL 60015 Telephone: (224) 632-4500 Facsimile: (224) 632-4521 Email: skanner@fklmlaw.com blondon@fklmlaw.com dmillen@fklmlaw.com mmoskovitz@fklmlaw.com bhogan@fklmlaw.com - and - Karen Hanson Riebel, Esq. Brian D. Clark, Esq. LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P. Suite 2200 100 Washington Avenue South Minneapolis, MN 55401-2159 Tel. (612) 339-6900 Email: khreibel@locklaw.com bdclark@locklaw.com - and - Katrina Carroll, Esq. CARLSON LYNCH LLP 111 W. Washington Street, Suite 1240 Chicago, Illinois 60602 Telephone: (312) 750-1265 Email: kcarroll@carlsonlynch.com - and - Gary F. Lynch, Esq. CARLSON LYNCH SWEET KILPELA & CARPENTER, LLP 1133 Penn Avenue, 5th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Tel: (412) 322-9243 Email: glynch@carlsonlynch.com - and - Guido Saveri, Esq. R. Alexander Saveri SAVERI & SAVERI, INC. 706 Sansome Street San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 217-6810 Email: guido@saveri.com rick@saveri.com - and - Eugene A. Spector, Esq. William G. Caldes, Esq. Jeffrey J. Corrigan, Esq. Jeffrey L. Spector, Esq. SPECTOR ROSEMAN & KODROFF, P.C. 1818 Market Street, Suite 2500 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 496-0300 Email: espector@srkattorneys.com bcaldes@srkattorneys.com jcorrigan@srkattorneys.com jspector@srkattorneys.com - and - Bradford L. Geyer, Esq. GEYERGOREY LLP 2006 Berwick Drive Cinnaminson, NJ 08077 Telephone: (856) 607-5708 - and - David P. McLafferty, Esq. MCLAFFERTY LAW FIRM, P.C. 923 Fayette Street Conshohocken, PA 19428 Tel: (610) 940-4000 Fax: (610) 940-4007 Email: dmclafferty@mclaffertylaw.com GENERAL MOTORS: Burgeson Sues Over Defective Engine System ---------------------------------------------------------- JASMINE BURGESON, Plaintiff, v. GENERAL MOTORS LLC; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 19STCV31665 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Sept. 6, 2019) is an action seeking to redress Defendant's violations of California consumer fraud statutes, and also seeks recovery for Defendant's breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, and common law fraud. General Motors was engaged in the business of designing, manufacturing, constructing, assembling, marketing, distributing, and selling automobiles and other motor vehicles and motor vehicle components in Los Angeles County. Plaintiff purchased a 2011 Chevrolet Silverado 2500, vehicle identification number 1GC1KXC82BF168277, which was manufactured and or distributed by Defendant on January 9, 2011. Plaintiff received an express written warranty including, a 3-year/36,000mile express bumper to bumper warranty, a 5-year/100,000mile powertrain warranty which, inter alia, covers the engine and transmission, along with an extended warranty, for the emissions. Defendant undertook to preserve or maintain the utility or performance of the Vehicle or to provide compensation if there is a failure in utility or performance for a specified period of time. The warranty provided, in relevant part, that in the event a defect developed with the Vehicle during the warranty period, Plaintiff could deliver the Vehicle for repair services to Defendant's representative and the Vehicle would be repaired. During the warranty period, the Vehicle contained or developed defects. Said defects substantially impair the use, value, or safety of the Vehicle. The complaint alleges that the Defendant committed fraud by allowing the Vehicle to be sold to Plaintiff without disclosing that the Vehicle contained defects within the engine, and particularly its CP4 Fuel Pump, that can cause fuel pump failure resulting in spread of tiny metal particles throughout the fuel system, damaging the fuel system and engine. The CP4 high pressure fuel pump is referred to as a "ticking time bomb" which cause engine failures which eventually result in sudden and unexpected stalling and/or loss of power while driving. GM knew, or should have known, that the 2011-2016 Chevrolet Silverado 2500 and 3500 and GMC Sierra 2500 and 3500 vehicles experience fuel pump failure resulting in fuel system and engine damage, says the complaint.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Tionna Dolin, Esq. Strategic Legal Practices A Professional Corporation 1840 Century Park East, Suite 430 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Phone: (310) 929-4900 Facsimile: (310) 943-3838 Email: dtai@slpattorney.com GOKUL RX LLC: Katz Suit Asserts TCPA Violation Over Fax Ads ----------------------------------------------------------- BRUCE KATZ, M.D., P.C., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. GOKUL RX LLC, a Florida limited liability company, and BENZER FRANCHISING LLC, a Florida limited liability company, Case No. 8:19-cv-02210 (M.D. Fla., Sept. 4, 2019), arises from Gokul's transmission of fax advertisements as part of its relationship with Benzer without recipients' consent, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Gokul RX, LLC, doing business as Gokul Benzer Pharmacy, is a Florida limited liability company with its principal place of business in this District. Gokul Benzer Pharmacy markets and engages in business activities throughout the State of Florida. Gokul Benzer Pharmacy is the franchisor of Benzer branded pharmacies. Benzer Franchising LLC is a Florida limited liability company with its principal place of business in this District. Benzer markets and engages in business activities throughout the State of Florida. The Defendants' pharmacy business includes advertising prescription drugs. The Defendants' business model includes marketing those drugs through facsimile advertisements.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Avi R. Kaufman, Esq. KAUFMAN P.A. 400 NW 26TH Street Miami, FL 33127 Telephone: (305) 469-5881 E-mail: kaufman@kaufmanpa.com HEARST MAGAZINE: Sued Over Auto-Renewal of Service Subscriptions ---------------------------------------------------------------- FENELLA ARNOLD and KELLY NAKAI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. HEARST MAGAZINE MEDIA, INC., a Delaware corporation; CDS GLOBAL, INC., an Iowa corporation; and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 37-2019-00047733-CU-BT-CTL (Cal. Super. Ct., San Diego Cty., Sept. 10, 2019) is a class action complaint alleging that Defendants violated California law in connection with magazine marketing and subscription programs. Among other things, Hearst and CDS work together to enroll consumers in automatic-renewal or continuous service subscriptions without providing the "clear and conspicuous" disclosures mandated by California law; post charges to consumers' credit or debit cards for purported automatic renewal or continuous service subscriptions without first obtaining the consumers' affirmative consent to an agreement containing the requisite clear and conspicuous disclosures; and solicit payment of money for goods that consumers did not order by sending "invoices" for amounts that are not actually owed. This course of conduct violates the California Automatic Renewal Law, California's statutory prohibition on soliciting payment for unordered goods or services by means of false invoices, the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, and the Unfair Competition Law, says the complaint. Plaintiffs are individuals residing in San Diego County, California who entered the Defendants' magazine subscriptions. Hearst is one of the largest magazine publishers in the world.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: JAMES T. HANNINK, ESQ. ZACH P. DOSTART, ESQ. DOSTART HANNINK & COVENEY LLP 4180 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 530 La Jolla, CA 92037-1474 Phone: 858-623-4200 Fax: 858-623-4299 Email: jhannink@sdlaw.com zdostart@sdlaw.com HILLSTONE HEALTHCARE: Hudson, et al. Seek Reinstatement of Benefits ------------------------------------------------------------------- TIA HUDSON, BRENDA L. BENICKER, and DEBORAH COLEMAN, On behalf of themselves and other similarly situated participants, Plaintiffs, v. HILLSTONE HEALTHCARE, INC., A/K/A HILLSTONE GROUP, CORNERSTONE INNOVATIONS, INC. D/B/A DIVERSIFIED EMPLOYEE SOLUTIONS, INC., PAUL BERGSTEN, MATT DAPORE, and STEVEN ODDO, Defendants, Case No. (S.D. Ohio, Sept. 6, 2019) brings claims for breach of fiduciary duty and prohibited transactions under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 against Defendants. Plaintiff Tia Hudson, in late 2018 and early 2019, after being diagnosed with a brain tumor and incurring significant medical expenses, discovered that the health coverage under the health care plan sponsored by her employer(s) had been terminated due to Defendants nonpayment of premiums, with no notice to her. Worse yet, Hillstone Healthcare, Inc., through Cornerstone Innovations, Inc., continued to deduct her employee contributions for health benefits from Hudson's bi-weekly paycheck, even though the Plans' coverage was terminated and even though Defendants were not forwarding Plaintiffs' contributions to the plans. In addition, Plaintiff began participating in the company sponsored 401k Plan in approximately September 2017 when she became eligible to participate in the Plan and authorized Defendants to withhold retirement contributions to be deposited to her account. Upon information and belief, Hillstone, through Cornerstone, has retained all contributions and/or failed to segregate withholdings in a timely manner, and failed to make any matching employer contributions required under the Plan, and have refused to provide Hudson with information about the retirement Plan. Plaintiff Deborah Coleman, in 2018, after incurring substantial medical bills, discovered that the health coverage under the health care plans sponsored by her employer had been terminated due to Defendants nonpayment of premiums, with no notice to her. Worse yet, Hillstone Healthcare, Inc., through Cornerstone Innovations, Inc., continued to deduct her employee contributions for health, vision, dental, and life insurance benefits from Coleman's bi-weekly paycheck, even though the Plan's coverage was terminated and even though Defendants were not forwarding Plaintiffs' contributions to the plans. Plaintiff Brenda Benicker, after incurring substantial medical expenses, learned that her coverage under the health care plan had been terminated with no notice to her, due to Defendants' failure to make the required premium payments. She also discovered that dental, vision, life insurance, and disability insurance coverage had been terminated for the same reasons. Despite several attempts to notify Hillstone Healthcare, Inc. that the plans were terminated and her dental and medical bills were not covered, Hillstone Healthcare, Inc., through Cornerstone Innovations, Inc., continued to deduct employee contribution for health, dental, vision, life, and disability insurance from her bi-weekly paycheck, even though the Plans' coverage was terminated and even though Defendants stopped forwarding her deductions to the plans. Benicker resigned from Hillstone Healthcare, Inc. in or around November of 2018 because Defendants continued to deduct employee contributions for employee benefit plans despite the plans' coverage being terminated and because Defendants failed to respond to her requests for reimbursement. Plaintiffs seek reinstatement of their wrongfully terminated benefits, reimbursement for their wrongfully withheld employee contributions deducted from their paychecks, and they seek to be made whole for all losses incurred and benefits due based on the termination of Plan coverage without notice, and the failure to remit employee contributions under the Plans, says the complaint. Plaintiffs were participants in a health and welfare plan sponsored by their employer, Hillstone Healthcare, Inc. Hillstone is the fiduciary and plan sponsor for the health benefits plan, vision benefits plan, dental benefits plan, life insurance plan, disability insurance plan and the defined contribution retirement plan ("401K Plan") offered to its employees and in which Plaintiffs participated (collectively, "Plans").[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Hans A. Nilges, Esq. Nilges Draher LLC 7266 Portage Street, N.W., Suite D Massillon, OH 44646 Phone: (330) 470-4428 Facsimile: (330) 754-1430 Email: hans@ohlaborlaw.com - and - Jeffrey J. Moyle, Esq. Nilges Draher LLC 614 W. Superior Ave., Suite 1148 Cleveland, OH 44113 Phone: 216.230.2955 Facsimile: (330) 754-1430 Email: jmoyle@ohlaborlaw.com - and - Claire W. Bushorn Danzl, Esq. The Bushorn Firm, LLC 810 Sycamore Street Cincinnati, OH 45202 Phone: 513.827.5771 Fax 513.725.1148 Email: cbushorn@thebushornfirm.com IBEAT INC: Broward Psychology Sues Over Unsolicited Fax Ads ----------------------------------------------------------- BROWARD PSYCHOLOGY, P.A., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. IBEAT, INC., Case No. 0:19-cv-62200-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Sept. 4, 2019), is brought under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act arising from the Defendant's transmission of unsolicited fax advertisements marketing a heart monitor without regard for the expense to recipients or recipients' other rights. iBeat, Inc., doing business as 100Plus, is a Delaware corporation headquartered in San Francisco, California. The Defendant sells wearable heart monitors.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Avi R. Kaufman, Esq. KAUFMAN P.A. 400 NW 26TH Street Miami, FL 33127 Telephone: (305) 469-5881 E-mail: kaufman@kaufmanpa.com ILLINOIS: Donovan Sues DOH Over Medicaid Act Breach --------------------------------------------------- CHARLES DONOVAN, JAMES DALY, BARBARA DICKMAN, JUNE DOUGLAS, BETTY FLOYD, ELVIN GRIDER, DOLORES LAMPE, ELDON W. LANE, SHANE LUTHE, GRACE IRENE PALMER, TINA REESE, REVA SCHNEIDER, and BARBARA WRIGHT, Individually and as the representatives of a class of similarly situated persons, Plaintiffs, v. Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, THERESA A. EAGLESON, in her official capacity as Director of the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services, and GRACE B. HOU, in her official capacity as Director of the Illinois Department of Human Services ("DHS"), Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-06020 (N.D. Ill., Sept. 9, 2019) is an action arising under the Federal Medicaid Act and its implementing regulations, and a suit brought against the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services for failure to timely process claims for payment for medical care provided to Medicaid long term care recipients. The complaint alleges that rather than complying with the Court's order to bring its payment processing procedures into compliance, the State of Illinois arbitrarily and capriciously rejected or delayed the admission documents of thousands of Illinois nursing home residents, in an apparent attempt to avoid paying for care for Medicaid approved beneficiaries. Furthermore, the State declared that there is no method to appeal these admission rejections, in violation of the Due Process rights of thousands of Illinois nursing home residents. The named Plaintiffs are members of the classes they seek to represent. The classes consist of Illinois long term care residents, who were provided 24-hour skilled nursing care and supportive living services, and who are insolvent and entitled to receive Medicaid benefits pursuant to federal and state law, the complaint notes. Each named Plaintiff suffers from severe medical conditions which require 24-hour medical care and which substantially interfere with one or more life processes. The Illinois State Medicaid Plan operates under the statutory authority of Title XIX of the Social Security Act Medical Assistance Program. As a condition of receiving federal funds, HFS is required to administer the Medicaid program in the state of Illinois in compliance with the Federal Medicaid Act and implementing regulations. HFS assigns certain tasks associated with administering the Medicaid program in the state of Illinois to DHS, says the complaint. Plaintiffs are Illinois residents who have been approved for Medicaid benefits and are residents of an Illinois nursing home. Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services ("HFS") is an Illinois state agency that provides Medicaid services to enrollees in Illinois.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Kimberly M. Watt, Esq. SB2, Inc. 1426 N. 3rd Street, Suite 200 P.O BOX 5400 Harrisburg, PA 17110 Phone: (312) 989-2417 Facsimile: (717) 909-5925 Email: kwatt@sb2inc.com INDOCHINO APPAREL: Borg Hits Illegal Telemarketing SMS Ads ---------------------------------------------------------- David Borg, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Indochino Apparel US Inc., Defendant, Case No. 19-cv-23473 (S.D. Fla., August 20, 2019), seeks statutory damages, punitive damages, costs and attorney fees for violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Indochino Apparel is a retailer of custom-made menswear, including suits and other formalwear. To promote its services, it engages in unsolicited SMS ads sent en masse via an auto dialer. Borg did not give his express written consent to be contacted in such manner, notes the complaint. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Scott Edelsberg, Esq. Jordan D. Utanski, Esq. EDELSBERG LAW, PA 19495 Biscayne Blvd #607 Aventura, FL 33180 Telephone: (305) 975-3320 Email: scott@edelsberglaw.com utanski@edelsberglaw.com - and - Andrew J. Shamis, Esq. Garrett O. Berg, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A. 14 NE 1st Avenue, Suite 400 Miami, FL 33132 Telephone: 305-479-2299 Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com gberg@shamisgentile.com JEFFERSON CAPITAL: Kim Files FDCPA Suit in New Jersey ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against JEFFERSON CAPITAL SYSTEMS, LLC. The case is styled as CHARLIE KIM, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. JEFFERSON CAPITAL SYSTEMS, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 2:19-cv-17967 (D. N.J., Sept. 13, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Jefferson Capital Systems, LLC provides financial services. The Company offers payment rewards, bankruptcy claims, and debt collection services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Craig B. Sanders, Esq. BARSHAY SANDERS PLLC 100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500 Garden City, NY 11530 Phone: (516) 203-7600 Fax: (516) 281-7601 Email: csanders@barshaysanders.com JPMORGAN CHASE: Leitzke Suit Transferred to M.D. Florida -------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as DUSTY LEITZKE, On Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, vs. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., the Defendant, Case No. 2:19-cv-02679 (Filed June 25, 2019), was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida (Tampa) on Sept. 5, 2019. The Middle District of Florida Court Clerk assigned Case No. 8:19-cv-02174-VMC-AEP to the proceeding. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington. The Plaintiff and the other Investigators routinely work(ed) hours over 40 per week without overtime compensation as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act. Chase misclassifies Plaintiff and Investigators nationwide as exempt employees. The Dusty Leitzke is a current FCOI Investigator for Chase. She performs computer data entry work while applying mandatory Chase policies, procedures, and guidelines to determine cases Chase assigns her. Chase treats her and other Investigators as exempt, salaried employees who are not eligible for overtime compensation for any hours worked over 40 per week.[BN] Attorneys for the Plaintiff are: Robi J. Baishnab, Esq. Hans A. Nilges, Esq. Shannon Marie Draher, Esq. NILGES DRAHER LLC 34 N. High St., Ste. 502 Columbus, OH 43215 Telephone: (614) 824-5770 Facsimile: (330) 754-1430 E-mail: rbaishnab@ohlaborlaw.com hans@ohlaborlaw.com sdraher@ohlaborlaw.com - and - Rowdy B. Meeks, Esq. ROWDY MEEKS LEGAL GROUP LLC 8201 Mission Rd., Suite 250 Prairie Village, KS 66208 E-mail: Rowdy.Meeks@rmlegalgroup.com Telephone: 913-76-5587 Facsimile: 816-75-5069 JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. is represented by: Alyson A. Terrell, Esq. Jeffrey S. Dunlap, Esq. ULMER & BERNE, LLP 65 E. State Street, Suite 1100 Columbus, OH 43215 Telephone: (614) 229-0042 Facsimile: (614) 229-0043 E-mail: aterrell@ulmer.com jdunlap@ulmer.com - and - Samuel Scott Shaulson, Esq. Sari M. Alamuddin, Esq. Stephanie R. Reiss, Esq. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS, LLP 101 Park Ave New York, NY 10178-0060 Telephone: (212) 309-6718 Facsimile: (212) 309-6273 E-mail: isshaulson@morganlewis.com salamuddin@morganlewis.com stephanie.reiss@morganlewis.com JUUL LABS: Foss Disputes e-Cigarette Products' Safety ----------------------------------------------------- Christian Foss, on behalf of themselves, the general public and those similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. JUUL Labs, Inc., Altria Group, Inc., and Philip Morris USA, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-05557 (N.D. Ill., August 19, 2018), seeks actual, punitive or compensatory damages, restitution, injunctive relief pursuant to the California Business & Professions Code and the California Civil Code, compensatory damages, reasonable attorneys' fees, costs of suit incurred and such further relief. JUUL, partnering with Philip Morris, is a provider of e-cigarettes and nicotine pods in the United States and abroad. They market their products as safe, candy-like products that are attractive to minors and nonsmokers, despite the fact that it contains more potent doses of nicotine than cigarettes, making them particularly addictive, and without disclosing any of the myriad problems that are likely to occur from the use of the products, including long-term nicotine addiction, increased risk of heart disease and stroke, changes in brain functionality that lead to increased susceptibility to anxiety, depression and other addictions, decreased functionality of the endocrine system, heightened risk of cancer and negative effects on fertility, says the complaint. Philip Morris USA, Inc. (Philip Morris), is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Altria. Plaintiff is represented by: Stephen Cady, Esq. Ken Moll, Esq. MOLL LAW GROUP 22W Washington Street, 15th Floor Chicago, IL 60602 Tel: (312) 462-1700 Fax: (312) 756-0045 Email: scady@molllawgroup.com kmoll@molllawgroup.com KING CREDIT: Fields Suit Asserts FCRA Breach -------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Kings Credit Services. The case is styled as Teresa Fields, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Kings Credit Services, and John Does 1-25, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-at-00663 (E.D. Cal., Sept. 13, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Kings Credit Services was founded in 1932. The company's line of business includes providing mercantile and consumer credit reporting services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jonathan Aaron Stieglitz, Esq. Jonathan Stieglitz Law Offices 11845 West Olympic Boulevard, Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90064 Phone: (323) 979-2063 Fax: (323) 488-6748 Email: jonathan.a.stieglitz@gmail.com L.V. & L. RESORT: Murphy Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against L. V. & L., Resort Corporation. The case is styled as James Murphy ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND ALL OTHER PERSONS SIMILARLY SITUATED, Plaintiff v. L. V. & L., Resort Corporation, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-08569 (S.D. N.Y., Sept. 15, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities Act. L. V. & L., Resort Corporation is a resort in NEW YORK.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Zare Khorozian, Esq. Zare Khorozian Law, LLC 1047 Anderson Avenue Fort Lee, NJ 07024 Phone: (201) 957-7269 Email: zare@zkhorozianlaw.com LYFT INC: Toscano Sues Over Share Price Drop -------------------------------------------- LUIS TOSCANO, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. LYFT, INC.; LOGAN GREEN; JOHN ZIMMER; BRIAN ROBERTS; PRASHANT (SEAN) AGGARWAL; BEN HOROWITZ; VALERIE JARRETT; DAVID LA WEE; HIROSHI MIKIT ANI; ANN MIURA-KO; MARY AGNES (MAGGIE) WILDEROTTER; J.P. MORGAN SECURITIES LLC; CREDIT SUISSE SECURITIES (USA) LLC; JEFFERIES LLC; UBS SECURITIES LLC; STIFEL, NICOLAUS & COMPANY, INCORPORATED; RBC CAPITAL MARKETS, LLC; KEYBANC CAPITAL MARKETS INC.; COWEN AND COMPANY, LLC; RAYMOND JAMES & ASSOCIATES, INC.; CANACCORD GENUITY LLC; EVERCORE GROUP L.L.C.; PIPER JAFFRA Y & CO.; JMP SECURITIES LLC; WELLS FARGO SECURITIES, LLC; KKR CAPITAL MARKETS LLC; ACADEMY SECURITIES, INC.; BLAYLOCK VAN, LLC; PENSERRA SECURITIES LLC; SIEBERT CISNEROS SHANK & CO., L.L.C.; THE WILLIAMS CAPITAL GROUP, L.P., CASTLEOAK SECURITIES, L.P.; C.L. KING & ASSOCIATES, INC.; DREXEL HAMILTON, LLC; GREAT PACIFIC SECURITIES; LOOP CAPITAL MARKETS LLC; MISCHLER FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.; SAMUEL A. RAMIREZ & COMPANY, INC.; R. SEELAUS & CO., LLC; TIGRESS FINANCIAL PARTNERS LLC, and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. CGC-19-579089 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco Cty., Sept. 9, 2019) is a securities class action on behalf of all persons and entities who purchased or acquired shares of Lyft, Inc. stock pursuant or traceable to the Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with the Company's initial public offering on September 20, 2018 and is an action brought under the Securities Act of 1933 against: (1) Lyft; (2) certain ofthe Company's current and former officers and directors; and (3) the investment banks that acted as underwriters for the IPO. According to the complaint, the Registration Statement and Prospectus contained materially misleading statements and/or omissions of facts that were required to be disclosed, and Defendants are liable in their capacities as issuer, statutory seller and/or offeror of the shares that were sold in the IPO. On March 28, 2019, Lyft conducted an initial public offering through which it offered 32.5 million shares of Class A common stock to the public at a price of $72.00 per share for anticipated total proceeds of over $2.275 billion. In connection with the IPO, Lyft shares were listed and traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market. Around the same time, Uber was positioning itself for its own initial public offering and listing on the New York Stock Exchange. The IPO documents omitted any facts concerning the multitude of complaints that Lyft has received, lawsuits that have been threatened and filed against Lyft, and regulatory investigations of Lyft concerning or arising from sexual assault by drivers and other similar misconduct by drivers or threats to passenger safety, notes the complaint. The IPO documents further misrepresented the sufficiency of Lyft's internal controls and reporting procedures relating to driver safety issues, the Company's processes and procedures concerning background checks and approval of drivers, and the growing problem of sexual assault and similar misconduct by drivers in the rideshare industry in general, and specifically by Lyft drivers. The IPO documents also falsely and misleadingly and reported by passengers ofLyft regarding drivers persons using Lyft's platform. The representations in the Registration Statement were materially inaccurate, misleading, and/or incomplete because the Registration Statement omitted and failed to disclose, among other things, that: (1) Lyft fails to maintain an effective system of internal controls and reporting procedures concerning driver safety issues; (2) Lyft fails to perform adequate background checks of its drivers; (3) sexual assault and similar driver safety issues have led to thousands of complaints by Lyft' s customers and passengers, as well as investigations by various government and municipal agencies, and lawsuits against Lyft that were threatened or filed even before the IPO; (4) Lyft's costs of defending, settling and/or satisfying any adverse judgment that may be entered in the lawsuits against Lyft arising from sexual assaults and similar driver safety issues are reasonably likely to be material, and continue to increase; and (5) as a result of the foregoing, Lyft's claimed ridesharing market position and future growth prospects are overstated, including in relation to Uber. Accordingly, the price of the Company's shares was artificially and materially inflated at the time of the Offering. In the wake of the IPO, the Company's shares have sharply fallen below the IPO price. In May 2019, Lyft announced its financial results for the first quarter of2019. and reported an adjusted per-share loss of$9.02. On September 5, 2019, Lyft stock closed at $46.40 per share. By this action, Plaintiff, on behalf of itself and the other Class members, who also acquired the Company's shares pursuant or traceable to the IPO, now seeks to obtain a recovery for the damages suffered as a result of Defendants' violations of the Securities Act, says the complaint. Plaintiff Luis Toscano purchased shares of Lyft common stock that were issued pursuant and traceable to the Registration Statement and IPO and was damaged thereby. Lyft is a transportation network company based in San Francisco, California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: MARY E. ALEXANDER, ESQ. BRENDAN D.S. WAY, ESQ. Mary Alexander & Associates, P.C. 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 1303 San Francisco, CA 94104 Phone: (415) 433-4440 Facsimile: (415) 433-5440 MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL: Hall Sues Over Deceptive Hotel Room Pricing ------------------------------------------------------------------- TODD HALL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Delaware corporation; Defendant, Case No. 3:19-cv-01715-H-AHG (S.D. Cal., Sept. 9, 2019) is an action against Defendant, alleging that Defendant misleads consumers concerning the amounts they must pay for rooms at their hotels. For at least the last decade, Marriott has used an unlawful trade practice called "drip pricing" in advertising its hotel rooms whereby Marriott initially hides a portion of a hotel room's daily rate from consumers. Plaintiff brings this action to force Marriott to advertise up-front to consumers the true prices of its hotel rooms, notes the complaint. Plaintiff institutes this proceeding to stop Marriott from engaging in the unlawful trade practices in connection with its offer and sale of hotel rooms to consumers, including its practices of (1) misleading consumers concerning the amounts they must pay for rooms at their hotels, and (2) advertising hotel rooms without the intent to supply them at advertised prices. Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to prevent Defendant from engaging in these and similar unlawful trade practices, civil penalties to deter Defendant and others similarly situated from engaging in these and similar unlawful trade practices, and the payment of costs, attorney's fees, and restitution based on the harm consumers have experienced due to Defendant's conduct. Plaintiff Todd Hall is a citizen of the State of California and resides in Rancho Cucamonga, California and has stayed in various Marriott hotels and resorts within the class period. Marriott is a multinational hospitality company that owns, manages and franchises a broad portfolio of hotels and lodging facilities throughout the United States and abroad, including approximately 60 facilities located in the San Diego District.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: RONALD A. MARRON, ESQ. MICHAEL T. HOUCHIN, ESQ. LILACH HALPERIN, ESQ. LAW OFFICES OF RONALD A. MARRON 651 Arroyo Drive San Diego, CA 92103 Phone: (619) 696-9006 Facsimile: (619) 564-6665 Email: ron@consumersadvocates.com mike@consumersadvocates.com lilach@consumersadvocates.com MIDWEST TITLE: Sent Doyle Illegal Automated Collection Text Msgs. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Donald Doyle, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Midwest Title Loans, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-05588, (N.D. Ill., August 19, 2019), seeks injunctive relief, statutory damages, treble damages and all other relief for violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Doyle took out a title loan from Midwest Title Loans, Inc. In October 2018, Midwest began sending text messages to Doyle's cellular telephone to collect on the debt using an automated dialer. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: James C. Vlahakis, Esq. SULAIMAN LAW GROUP, LTD. 2500 South Highland Avenue, Suite 200 Lombard, IL 60148 Tel: (630) 581-5456 Email: jvlahakis@sulaimanlaw.com MILO CAFE: Shaba Seeks Overtime Pay for Restaurant Staff -------------------------------------------------------- ANA SHABA, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. MILO CAFE CORP. (d/b/a TRU CAFE or TRU WINE BAR), LOUIS LOIZOU, and MICHAEL MILTIADOU, the Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-05069 (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 5, 2019), seeks to recover overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Plaintiff and the other FLSA Collective Plaintiffs are and have been similarly situated, have had similar job requirements and pay provisions, and are and have been subject to Defendants' decision, policy, plan, and common policies, programs, practices, procedures, protocols, routines, and rules, willfully failing and refusing to pay them at the legally-required minimum wage for all hours worked and 1.5 times this rate for work in excess of 40 hours per work week, and unlawfully retaining a portion of their tips. Ms. Shaba was employed by Defendants as a bartender/barista from approximately May 2019 to August 2019. Shaba worked six days a week and an average of 40-50 hours per week. Milo Cafe is a New York corporation that operates Tru Cafe (also known as Tru Wine Bar), located at 35-19 Ditmars Blvd., Astoria, New York 11105.[BN] Attorneys for Named Plaintiff, proposed FLSA Collective Plaintiffs, and proposed Class, are: Michael P. Pappas, Esq. MICHAEL P. PAPPAS LAW FIRM, P.C. 3 Columbus Circle, 15th Floor New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (646) 770-7890 Facsimile: (646) 417-6688 MONARCH RECOVERY: Bail Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Monarch Recovery Management, Inc. The case is styled as Nirvana L. Bail individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Monarch Recovery Management, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-05208 (E.D. N.Y., Sept. 12, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Monarch Recovery Management, Inc. operates as a collection agency. The Company provides debt recovery services such as new placement review, advanced skip tracing, and arranging promises to pay, as well as offers speech analytics, online payment portal, full call recording, and flexible collection systems.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David M. Barshay, Esq. Craig B. Sanders, Esq. Barshay Sanders, PLLC 100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500 Garden City, NY 11530 Phone: (516) 203-7600 Fax: (516) 281-7601 Email: dbarshay@barshaysanders.com csanders@barshaysanders.com MONDELEZ GLOBAL: Walters Seeks Unpaid Wages & OT for Merchandisers ------------------------------------------------------------------ LESLIE WALTERS, an individual, on behalf of the State 0f California, as a private attorney general, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. MONDELEZ GLOBAL, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company; MONDELEZ INTERNATIONAL, INC., an Illinois Corporation, MONDELEZ FOUNDATION INTERNATIONAL, an Illinois Corporation; MONDELEZ INTERNATIONAL HOLDINGS LLC, an Illinois Limited Liability Company; and DOES 1-50, the Defendants, Case No. 19CV354170 (Cal. Super., Sep. 5, 2019), alleges the Defendants failed to pay minimum wage for all hours worked; failed to pay overtime; failed to provide meal periods or pay premiums in lieu thereof; failed to provide rest periods or pay premiums in lieu thereof; failed to reimburse necessary failure to business expenses; and failed to provide accurate itemized wage statements under the California Labor Code. The Plaintiff and overtime aggrieved employees consistently worked all shifts in excess 0f eight hours in a workday and 40 hours in a workweek, and worked on the seventh consecutive day in a workweek. The Plaintiff is employed as a Merchandiser With Defendant. Mondelez is an American multinational confectionery, food, and beverage company based in Illinois which employs approximately 83,000 individuals around the world.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Aggrieved Employees are: Martin Sullivan, Esq. Jonathan Melmed, Esq. MELMED LAW GROUP P.C. 1180 South Beverly Drive, Suite 610 Los Angeles, CA 90035 Telephone: (310) 824-3828 Facsimile: (310) 862—6851 E-mail: ms@melmedlaw.com jm@melmedlaw.com MSG NETWORKS: Gould Sues BOD for Breaches of Fiduciary Duty ----------------------------------------------------------- JAMES R. GOULD, JR., on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated stockholders of MSG NETWORKS INC., Plaintiff, v. MSG NETWORKS INC. JAMES L. DOLAN, CHARLES F. DOLAN, PAUL J. DOLAN, THOMAS C. DOLAN, QUENTIN F. DOLAN, KRISTIN A. DOLAN, BRIAN SWEENEY, WILLIAM J. BELL, HANK J. RATNER, JOSEPH J. LHOTA, JOEL M. LITVIN, and JOHN L. SYKES, Defendants, Case No. 2019-0718- (Del. Chancery Ct., Sept. 6, 2019) is a class action complaint against the members of the board of directors of MSGN brought by Plaintiff seeking to remedy the MSGN Board's breaches of fiduciary duty. One week after announcing poor earnings and with the Company's stock trading at multi-year lows, MSGN announced a self-tender offer for $250 million in value of Company stock. Through the Self-Tender, up to 27% of the Company's public stockholders will be cashed out of their investment while MSGN's controlling stockholder--the Dolan Family--will meaningfully increase their voting power and equity stake in the Company. On August 30, 2019, MSG filed an offer to purchase and certain other tender offer-related documentation (collectively, the "Tender Offer Documents") with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and commenced the Self-Tender. The Offer to Purchase reveals that while not making a "recommendation" regarding whether stockholders should tender their shares, the MSGN board of directors "has authorized the Company to make the Offer." The complaint alleges that the Tender Offer Documents omit a litany of material information that is necessary for MSGN stockholders to make an informed tender decision, including, among other things: (1) whether the Dolan Family members and loyalists on the Board participated in the decision to increase the size of MSGN's share repurchase program1 and "authorize" the Self-Tender, (2) how the range of prices to be paid in the Self-Tender (i.e., $15.00 to $17.50 per share) was established, (3) a summary of any financial analysis, including projections and Company/share valuations, received by the Board and/or MSGN in connection with the decision to authorize the Self-Tender, and (4) all ties or business relationships between BofA Securities, Inc.--which served as MSGN's dealer manager for the Self-Tender--on the one hand, and MSGN, the Dolan Family or any of the Dolan Family's other companies and business ventures on the other. Without disclosure of this material information, MSGN stockholders cannot adequately assess (i) the independence of the process leading to the Board's decision to increase MSGN's share repurchase program and to authorize the Self-Tender, or (ii) the financial fairness of the Self-Tender. Moreover, MSGN stockholders are unable to determine whether the Self-Tender is merely an opportunistic attempt by the Dolan Family to take advantage of the severe--but likely temporary--depression of MSGN's stock price by using Company funds to cash out a significant number of the Company's minority public stockholders and thus increase the Dolan Family's ownership stake in MSGN, says the complaint. Plaintiff is a stockholder of MSGN and has owned MSGN Class A common stock at all material times alleged in this Complaint. MSGN owns and operates regional sports and entertainment networks.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeremy S. Friedman, Esq. David F.E. Tejtel, Esq. FRIEDMAN OSTER & TEJTEL PLLC 493 Bedford Center Road, Suite 2D Bedford Hills, NY 10507 Phone: (888) 529-1108 - and - Stephen D. Dargitz, Esq. Samuel L. Closic, Esq. PRICKETT, JONES & ELLIOTT, P.A. 1310 N. King Street Wilmington, DE 19801 Phone: (302) 888-6500 - and - Peter B. Andrews, Esq. Craig J. Springer, Esq. David M. Sborz, Esq. ANDREWS & SPRINGER LLC 3801 Kennett Pike Building C, Suite 305 Wilmington, DE 19807 Phone: (302) 504-4957 - and - D. Seamus Kaskela, Esq. KASKELA LAW LLC 18 Campus Boulevard, Suite 100 Newtown Square, PA 19073 Phone: (888) 715-1740 - and - Alfred G. Yates, Jr., Esq. LAW OFFICE OF ALFRED G. YATES, JR. 300 Mt. Lebanon Boulevard, Suite 206B Pittsburgh, PA 15234 Phone: (412) 391-5164 NATURAL ESSENTIALS: Diaz Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Natural Essentials, Incorporated. The case is styled as Edwin Diaz on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Natural Essentials, Incorporated, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-08498 (S.D. N.Y., Sept. 12, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Natural Essentials is a full scale OTC drug manufacturer and contract filler of essentials oils, natural ingredients and more.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph H Mizrahi, Esq. Cohen & Mizrahi LLP 300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor Brooklyn, NY 11201 Phone: (917) 299-6612 Fax: (929) 575-4195 Email: joseph@cml.legal NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT: Hawkins Sues Over TCPA Violation ----------------------------------------------------- BEN HAWKINS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. NAVY FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-01186-LMB-IDD (E.D. Va., Sept. 13, 2019) is a class action against Defendant to secure redress for its sending of numerous nonconsensual, autodialed text message calls to the cellular telephone numbers of Plaintiff and others nationwide, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Plaintiff received these and hundreds of other unauthorized autodialed texts messages on his cell phone from Defendant even though Plaintiff does not have, and has never had, an account, credit card, or debit card issued by NFCU. Indeed, Plaintiff has never been a customer or member of NFCU, and NFCU did not have Plaintiff's consent to send text messages to his cell phone. NFCU caused hundreds of unsolicited, autodialed text message calls to be made to Plaintiff's cell phone, causing Plaintiff aggravation and inconvenience. Plaintiff files this class action complaint on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, seeking relief from NFCU's illegal calling practices, says the complaint. Plaintiff Ben Hawkins is a natural person and a citizen of the State of Kentucky. NFCU, is a technology-driven financial services company providing a diverse range of banking products and services nationwide, including mobile banking services, for current and former military service members, their families, and household members.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David J. Dickens, Esq. THE MILLER FIRM, LLC 108 Railroad Avenue Orange, VA, 22960 Phone: (540) 672-4224 Fax: (540) 672-3055 Email: ddickens@millerfirmllc.com - and - Alexander H. Burke, Esq. Daniel J. Marovitch, Esq. BURKE LAW OFFICES, LLC 155 N. Michigan Ave., Suite 9020 Chicago, IL 60601 Phone: (312) 729-5288 Email: aburke@burkelawllc.com dmarovitch@burkelawllc.com - and - Jeff Goldenberg, Esq. GOLDENBERG SCHNEIDER, LPA One West Fourth Street, 18th Floor Cincinnati, OH 45202 Phone: 513-345-8291 Fax: 513-345-8294 Email: JGoldenberg@gs-legal.com - and - Joseph M. Lyon, Esq. THE LYON FIRM 2021 Auburn Ave. Cincinnati, OH 45219 Phone: (513) 381-2333 Email: jlyon@thelyonfirm.com NEKTAR THERAPEUTICS: Damiba Hits Share Price Drop ------------------------------------------------- Philippe Damiba, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Nektar Therapeutics, Howard W. Robin and Gil M. Labrucherie, Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-05173 (N.D. Cal., August 19, 2019), seeks to recover compensable damages caused by violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Nektar is a biopharmaceutical company that develops medicines in areas of high unmet medical need, including therapies for cancer, autoimmune disease, and chronic pain. Its lead immuno-oncology candidate is NKTR-214, a biologic substance developed to stimulate proliferation and growth of tumor-killing immune cells in the tumor-micro-environment. On August 8, 2019, a manufacturing issue caused two batches to differ from the other 20 batches that were produced, thus resulting in variable clinical benefit than other batches used in the clinical trials. On this news, Nektar's share price fell $8.65, or nearly 30%, to close at $20.92 per share on August 9, 2019, on unusually heavy trading volume. Plaintiffs failed to disclose to investors that the Company did not comply with current good manufacturing practices. Damiba purchased Nektar securities lost and as a result of the federal securities law violations. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Lionel Z. Glancy, Esq. Robert V. Prongay, Esq. Charles H. Linehan, Esq. Pavithra Rajesh, Esq. Lesley F. Portnoy, Esq. GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 201-9150 Facsimile: (310) 201-9160 Email: info@glancylaw.com - and - Howard G. Smith, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF HOWARD G. SMITH 3070 Bristol Pike, Suite 112 Bensalem, PA 19020 Telephone: (215) 638-4847 Facsimile: (215) 638-4867 NORTH BEACH TAVERN: Santana Seeks OT Pay for Restaurant Staff ------------------------------------------------------------- LEE SANTANA, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. NORTH BEACH TAVERN LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, and LARA YAGIRO, individually, the Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-23687-MGC (S.D. Fla., Sept. 5, 2019), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages, and the costs and reasonable attorneys' fees under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Throughout Plaintiff's employment with Defendants during the three year statute of limitations period between approximately September 2016 and May 2019, the Plaintiff regularly worked in excess of 40 hours per week but Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff time and one-half wages for all of his actual overtime hours worked each week, with Defendants instead paying Plaintiff straight-time wages in cash for his overtime hours each week, the lawsuit says. The Plaintiff and others similarly situated are current and former cooks and restaurant employees of Defendants. The Defendants owned and operated a bar-restaurant doing business as Norman's American Bar & Grill located at 6770 Collins Avenue, Miami Beach, Florida 33141 in Miami-Dade County.[BN] Attorneys for the Plaintiff are: Keith M. Stern, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF KEITH M. STERN, P.A. 80 S.W. 8th Street, Suite 2000 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 901-1379 E-mail: employlaw@keithstern.com PAINFUL PLEASURES: Diaz Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Painful Pleasures, LLC. The case is styled as Edwin Diaz on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Painful Pleasures, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-08504 (S.D. N.Y., Sept. 12, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Painful Pleasures, LLC ("Painful Pleasures") is a broadline distributor and branded consumer products company focused on the tattoo and body piercing industry.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph H Mizrahi, Esq. Cohen & Mizrahi LLP 300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor Brooklyn, NY 11201 Phone: (917) 299-6612 Fax: (929) 575-4195 Email: joseph@cml.legal PATENAUDE & FELIX: Haney Files FDCPA Suit in N.D. California ------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Patenaude & Felix. The case is styled as Gerrie Haney, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Patenaude & Felix, A Professional Corporation, Defendant, Case No. 3:19-cv-05780 (N.D. Cal., Sept. 13, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Patenaude & Felix is a debt collection law firm based in San Diego, California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jonathan Aaron Stieglitz, Esq. Jonathan Stieglitz Law Offices 11845 West Olympic Boulevard, Suite 800 Los Angeles, CA 90064 Phone: (323) 979-2063 Fax: (323) 488-6748 Email: jonathan.a.stieglitz@gmail.com PIE KINGZ: Shell Seeks Minimum Wages for Delivery Drivers --------------------------------------------------------- JASON SHELL, On behalf of himself and those similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. PIE KINGZ, LLC, PIEKINGZII, INC., PIE KINGZ 3, INC., PIEKINGZ 4, INC., MICHAEL J. VLASAK, and SEAN M. McEVOY, the Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-02043 (N.D. Ohio., Sept. 5, 2019), seeks to recover appropriate monetary, declaratory, and equitable relief based on Defendants' willful failure to compensate him and similarly situated individuals with minimum wages, as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Ohio Minimum Wage Fairness. The Defendants employ delivery drivers who work dual jobs, one inside the store completing non-tipped duties, and another on the road completing deliveries and receiving tips. The deliver drivers' inside job duties are not related to their tip-producing duties. Defendants' delivery drivers drive their own automobiles to deliver pizza and other food items to Defendants' customers. Instead of reimbursing their delivery drivers for the reasonably approximate costs of the business use of their vehicles, Defendants utilize a flawed method to determine reimbursement rates that provide such an unreasonably low rate beneath any reasonable approximation of the expenses the drivers incur that the drivers' unreimbursed expenses cause the drivers' wages to fall below the federal minimum wage during some or all workweeks. The Defendants together operate four Jet's Pizza franchise stores in Middleburg Heights, Parma (Pearl Road and Broadview Road), and Westlake, Ohio. All four stores are referred to as "the Westside Cleveland area Jet's Pizza stores."[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Putative Class are: Christina M. Royer, Esq. Stuart G. Torch, Esq. Christina M. Royer, Esq. ELFVIN, KLINGSHIRN, ROYER & TORCH, LLC 4700 Rockside Road, Suite 530 Independence, OH 44131 Telephone: (216) 382-2500 Facsimile: (216) 381-0250 E-mail: stuart@ekrtlaw.com chris@ekrtlaw.com - and - Andrew R. Biller, esq. Andrew P. Kimble, esq. BILLER & KIMBLE , LLC 3825 Edwards Road, Suite 650 Cincinnati, OH 45209 Telephone: (513) 202-0710 E-mail: abiller@billerkimble.com akimble@billerkimble.com PROCTER & GAMBLE: Slade Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against The Procter & Gamble Company. The case is styled as Linda Slade individually and as the representative of a class of similarly situated persons, Plaintiff v. The Procter & Gamble Company doing business as: oralb.com, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-08503 (S.D. N.Y., Sept. 12, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Procter & Gamble Company is an American multinational consumer goods corporation headquartered in downtown Cincinnati, Ohio, founded in 1837 by English American William Procter and Irish American James Gamble.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Dan Shaked, Esq. Shaked Law Group P.C. 44 Court Street, Suite 1217 Brooklyn, NY 11201 Phone: (917) 373-9128 Fax: (718) 504-7555 Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com RADIUS GLOBAL: Robinson Files FDCPA Suit in New Jersey ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Radius Global Solutions, LLC. The case is styled as TYISHA N. ROBINSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Radius Global Solutions, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 2:19-cv-17913 (D. N.J., Sept. 12, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Radius Global Solutions is a provider of account recovery and debt collection, customer relationship management and healthcare revenue cycle management solutions.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Craig B. Sanders, Esq. BARSHAY SANDERS PLLC 100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500 Garden City, NY 11530 Phone: (516) 203-7600 Fax: (516) 281-7601 Email: csanders@barshaysanders.com RBL LLC: Faces Matzura ADA Suit in New York ------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against RBL, LLC. The case is styled as Steven Matzura, On Behalf of Himself And All Other Persons Similarly Situated, Plaintiff v. RBL, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-08567 (S.D. N.Y., Sept. 15, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities Act. RBL, LLC specializes in bringing retail bargains to customers below retail price.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Zare Khorozian, Esq. Zare Khorozian Law, LLC 1047 Anderson Avenue Fort Lee, NJ 07024 Phone: (201) 957-7269 Email: zare@zkhorozianlaw.com RCI HOSPITALITY: Hernandez Hits Unpaid Wages, Misclassification --------------------------------------------------------------- AMY HERNANDEZ on Behalf of Herself and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. RCI HOSPITALITY HOLDINGS, INC.; XTC CABARET, INC. d/b/a XTC CABARET (AUSTIN); ERICK LAMKIM; AND WAYNE FENLON, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-00870-LY (W.D. Tex., Sept. 6, 2019) is an action brought as a Fair Labor Standard Act collective action on behalf of all persons who were or are employed by Defendants as exotic dancers at any time during the three years prior to the commencement of this action to present. The complaint alleges that Defendants required and/or permitted Plaintiff to work as an exotic dancer at their adult entertainment club but refused to compensate her at the applicable minimum wage. In fact, Defendants refused to compensate her whatsoever for any hours worked. Plaintiff's only compensation was in the form of tips from club patrons. The Defendants took money from Plaintiff in the form of "house fees" or "rental fee" as a prerequisite to do her job for the benefit of the club. Plaintiff was also required to divide her tips with Defendants' employees who do not customarily receive tips outside of a valid tip pool. The Defendants misclassify dancers, including Plaintiff, as independent contractors so that they do not have to compensate them at the federally mandated minimum wage rate. The Defendants' practice of failing to pay employees wages violates the FLSA's minimum wage provision, and Defendants' practice of charging house fees and dividing tips also violates Federal Law because it impermissibly passes the cost of doing business onto the employees of the club, says the complaint. Plaintiff was previously employed as an exotic dancer at Defendants' adult entertainment club during the statutory time period. Defendants operate an adult entertainment club in Austin, Texas, under the name of "XTC Cabaret (Austin)".[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Gabriel A. Assaad, Esq. KENNEDY HODGES, L.L.P. 4409 Montrose Blvd., Suite 200 Houston, TX 77006 Phone: (713) 523-0001 Facsimile: (713) 523-1116 Email: gassaad@kennedyhodges.com REAL VALUE PRODUCTS: Camp Drug Store Hits Illegally-faxed Ads ------------------------------------------------------------- Camp Drug Store, Inc., individually and as the representatives of a class of similarly-situated persons, Plaintiff, v. Real Value Products, Corp., Defendant, Case No. 19-cv-01009 (W.D. Tex., August 20, 2019), seeks statutory damages for each violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, injunctive relief, compensation and attorney fees and all other relief. Real Value Products, Corp. operates as Hospital Pharmaceutical Consulting, a wholesale pharmacy supplier offering prescription pharmaceuticals, including name brand and generic drugs. Real Value faxed advertisements about its products. Camp Drug Store did not expressly consent to receive any advertisements from them. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Tod A. Lewis, Esq. BOCK, HATCH, LEWIS & OPPENHEIM, LLC 134 N. La Salle St., Ste. 1000 Chicago, IL 60602 Tel: (312) 658-5500 Fax: (312) 658-5555 Email: service@classlawyers.com RESOURCE MARKETING: Loftus Suit Transferred to New York Dist. Ct. ----------------------------------------------------------------- The class action styled as William Loftus, Sidney Naiman, Louis Naiman, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Petitioners v. Resource Marketing Corp., Respondent, Case No. 3:19-cv-1608 filed in state court was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York on Sept. 12, 2019, and assigned Case No. 1:19-mc-00046-LEK-DJS. The Plaintiff subsequently filed a motion to "Produce Documents Pursuant to Subpoena" in the case. Resource Marketing Corp. specializes in providing extremely targeted, high quality leads to businesses by way of live call transfers.[BN] The Petitioners are represented by: Aytan Y Bellin, Esq. Bellin & Associates, LLC 50 Main Street, Suite 1000 White Plains, NY 10606 Phone: (914) 358-5345 Fax: (212) 571-0284 Email: aytan.bellin@bellinlaw.com ROCKWALL SPORTS: Smith Seeks Overtime Pay for Employees ------------------------------------------------------- MCKENZIE SMITH, ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, the PLAINTIFF, vs. ROCKWALL SPORTS, INC. AND KIM HOOKS, INDIVIDUALLY, the DEFENDANTS, Case No. 3:19-cv-02112-M (N.D. Tex., Sept. 5, 2019), seeks to recover overtime pay under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Even though Plaintiff and the Class Members were hourly employees, the Defendants have failed and refused to pay Plaintiff and the Class Members at time-and-one-half their regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours within a workweek. The Plaintiffs are Defendant's current and former employees who were paid an hourly rate and who were not paid overtime wages. The Defendants' actions were willful and in blatant disregard for the federally protected rights of Plaintiff and those similarly situated, the lawsuit says. The Defendants operate a sporting goods store that sells athletic equipment.[BN] Attorney for the Plaintiff are: Douglas B. Welmaker, Esq. MORELAND VERRETT, P.C. The Commissioners House at Heritage Square 2901 Bee Cave Road, Box L Austin, TX 78746 Telephone: (512) 782-0567 Facsimile: (512) 782-0605 E-mail: doug@morelandlaw.com SAPPHIRE NURSING: Schmidt Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct. ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against SAPPHIRE NURSING. The case is styled as SUSAN SCHMIDT, AS ATTY-IN-FACT FOR REGINA PINKALL INDVIDUALLY & ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, Plaintiffs v. SAPPHIRE NURSING AT, WAPPINGERS, LLC, MACHLA ABRAMCZYK, ESTHER FARKOVITS, RICHARD PLATSCHEK, ROBERT SCHUCK, Defendants, Case No. 52328/2019 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Dutchess Cty., Sept. 12, 2019). The case type is stated as "E-OTHER". Sapphire Care Group is a collection of five nursing homes in the Buffalo, NY area.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: FINKELSTEIN BLANKINSHIP FREI- 445 HAMILTON AVE., SUITE 605 WHITE PLAINS, NY 10601 Phone: (914) 298-3281 The Defendants are represented by: CAITLIN ROBIN & ASSOCIATES 30 BROAD ST., SUITE 702 NEW YORK, NY 10004 Phone: (646) 524-6026 SCHINDLER ELEVATOR: Foster Suit Removed to N.D. California ---------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned JEFFREY FOSTER, as an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. SCHINDLER ELEVATOR CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. RG19029640 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on Sept. 13, 2019, and assigned Case No. 3:19-cv-05776. The Complaint asserts causes of action on a class-wide basis for (1) failure to pay overtime wages pursuant to California Labor Code Sections 510, 558 and 1194; (2) failure to provide accurate wage statements pursuant to Labor Code Section 226; (3) violation of the Business and Professions Code Section 17200; and (4) penalties pursuant to the Private Attorney General Act.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: LYNNE C. HERMLE, ESQ. JULIA C. RIECHERT, ESQ. ANJALI PRASAD VADILLO, ESQ. ORRICK, HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP 1000 Marsh Road Menlo Park, CA 94025-1015 Phone: +1 650 614 7400 Facsimile: +1 650 614 7401 Email: lchermle@orrick.com jriechert@orrick.com avadillo@orrick.com SELECTBLINDS LLC: Diaz Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Selectblinds LLC. The case is styled as Edwin Diaz on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Selectblinds LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-08507 (S.D. N.Y., Sept. 12, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Selectblinds, LLC, is an online e-tailer of independently branded window fashions.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph H Mizrahi, Esq. Cohen & Mizrahi LLP 300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor Brooklyn, NY 11201 Phone: (917) 299-6612 Fax: (929) 575-4195 Email: joseph@cml.legal SHOE SHOW: Gray Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages ----------------------------------------------- Kawanna Gray, Natasha Davies and Kquaniea Ezell, Individually and on behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs v. Shoe Show, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 4:19-cv-00627-BRW (E.D. Ark., Sept. 6, 2019) is a group and collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act, for declaratory judgment, monetary damages, liquidated damages, prejudgment interest, and costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees, as a result of Defendant's failure to pay Plaintiffs and all other similarly situated employees lawful overtime compensation for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week. Plaintiffs' hours varied from week to week, but each Plaintiff regularly worked more than 40 hours a week, notes the complaint. Despite their overtime work, they were not properly compensated for all overtime hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week, the complaint asserts. Plaintiffs were employed by Defendant as hourly-paid employees. Defendant owns and operates several retail shoe stores throughout the State of Arkansas.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Steve Rauls, Esq. Josh Sanford, Esq. SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC One Financial Center 650 South Shackleford Road, Suite 411 Little Rock, AR 72211 Phone: (501) 221-0088 Facsimile: (888) 787-2040 Email: steve@sanfordlawfirm.com josh@sanfordlawfirm.com SKINIT ACQUISITION: Diaz Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Skinit Acquisition, LLC. The case is styled as Edwin Diaz on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Skinit Acquisition, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-08497 (S.D. N.Y., Sept. 12, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Skinit Acquisition, LLC offers personalized and branded cases & skins for consumer electronic devices.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph H Mizrahi, Esq. Cohen & Mizrahi LLP 300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor Brooklyn, NY 11201 Phone: (917) 299-6612 Fax: (929) 575-4195 Email: joseph@cml.legal SLACK TECHNOLOGIES: Chardonnet Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against SLACK TECHNOLOGIES, INC. The case is styled as LAURENT CHARDONNET, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, Plaintiff v. SLACK TECHNOLOGIES, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, ANDREW BRACCIA, STEWART BUTTERFIELD, EDITH COOPER, SARAH FRIAR, JOHN O'FARRELL, CHAMATH PALIHAPITIYA, ALLEN SHIM, GRAHAM SMITH, Defendants, Case No. CGC19579240 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco Cty., Sept. 12, 2019). The case type is stated as "SECURITIES/INVESTMENT". Slack Technologies, Inc. is an American software company founded in 2009 in Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. The core team is largely drawn from the founders of Ludicorp, the company that created Flick.[BN] SOUTHWOODS RV RESORT: Matzura Sues Over ADA Violation ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Southwoods RV Resort LLC. The case is styled as Steven Matzura, On Behalf of Himself And All Other Persons Similarly Situated, Plaintiff v. Southwoods RV Resort LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-08566 (S.D. N.Y., Sept. 15, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Southwoods RV Resort is a family-oriented campground in Upstate New York in Byron, off the New York State Thruway between exits 47 and 48.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Zare Khorozian, Esq. Zare Khorozian Law, LLC 1047 Anderson Avenue Fort Lee, NJ 07024 Phone: (201) 957-7269 Email: zare@zkhorozianlaw.com STAMPS.COM: Website not Accessible to Blind People, Diaz Says ------------------------------------------------------------- EDWIN DIAZ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. STAMPS.COM INC., the Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-08268 (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 5, 2019), alleges that Defendant failed to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired people. The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and therefore denial of its goods and services offered thereby, is a violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who requires screen-reading software to read website content using his computer. The Plaintiff uses the terms "blind" or "visually-impaired" to refer to all people with visual impairments who meet the legal definition of blindness in that they have a visual acuity with correction of less than or equal to 20 x 200. Some blind people who meet this definition have limited vision. Others have no vision. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. Based on a 2010 U.S. Census Bureau report, approximately 8.1 million people in the United States are visually impaired, including 2.0 million who are blind, and according to the American Foundation for the Blind's 2015 report, approximately 400,000 visually impaired persons live in the State of New York.[BN] Attorneys for the Plaintiff are: Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq. COHEN & MIZRAHI LLP 300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Fl. Brooklyn, New York 11201 Telephone: (929) 575-4175 E-mail: Joseph@cml.legal - and - Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq. Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq. GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES 150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR New York, NY 10003-2461 Telephone: (212) 228-9795 E-mail: nyjg@aol.com danalgottlieb@aol.com STREAMSIDE RV PARK: Matzura Suit Asserts ADA Breach --------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Streamside RV Park and Golf Course, Inc. The case is styled as Steven Matzura, On Behalf of Himself And All Other Persons Similarly Situated, Plaintiff v. Streamside RV Park and Golf Course, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-08565 (S.D. N.Y., Sept. 15, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Streamside RV Park and Golf Course, Inc. offers a 24 hole golf course and scenic RV facility, and it also offers an onsite restaurant, Divots.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Zare Khorozian, Esq. Zare Khorozian Law, LLC 1047 Anderson Avenue Fort Lee, NJ 07024 Phone: (201) 957-7269 Email: zare@zkhorozianlaw.com SUPERIOR MEDICAL: Howell Hits Time-shaving, Unpaid Overtime Pay --------------------------------------------------------------- LYNDA LEE HOWELL, on her own behalf and on behalf of those similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. SUPERIOR MEDICAL EQUIPMENT PLUS, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 95375345 (6th Judicial Circuit Ct., Pinellas Cty., Fla., Sept. 6, 2019) is an action for unpaid wages, and other relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff was paid on an hourly basis and not subject to any exemptions under the FLSA. Plaintiff was not paid overtime for all of the hours she worked beyond 40 in a single workweek. The Defendant also engaged in the illegal practice known as "time-shaving." The Defendant's time-shaving was done in order to avoid paying Plaintiff overtime wages. As a result, Plaintiff often performed work for which she was not compensated, says the complaint. Plaintiff worked as a customer service representative for Defendant. Defendant is a medical supplies manufacturer, and conducts business in, and is actively engaged in, interstate commerce.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: W. John Gadd, Esq. 2727 Ulmerton Rd. Ste. 210 Clearwater, FL 33762 Phone: (727) 524-6300 Email: wjg@mazgadd.com T.L. CANNON MANAGEMENT: Ferguson Suit Asserts ADA Breach --------------------------------------------------------- AMANDA FERGUSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. T.L. CANNON MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, a New York Corporation, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-01101-FJS-CFH (N.D. Cal., Sept. 6, 2019) is an action asserting violations of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, and its implementing regulations, in connection with accessibility barriers in the parking lots and paths of travel at various public accommodations owned, operated, controlled, and/or leased by Defendant. Plaintiff has a mobility disability and suffers from spinae bifida, which has caused her to use a wheelchair for mobility. Plaintiff has visited Defendant's facilities and was denied full and equal access as a result of Defendant's inaccessible parking lots and paths of travel. Unless Defendant is required to remove the access barriers, and required to change its policies and practices so that access barriers do not reoccur at Defendant's facilities, Plaintiff and the proposed Class will continue to be denied full and equal access to those facilities, says the complaint. Plaintiff Amanda Ferguson is a resident of the State of New York. As a result of her disability, Ms. Ferguson uses a wheelchair for mobility. T. L. Cannon Management Corporation is, and at all times relevant hereto was, a New York corporation, with its principal place of business in Buffalo, New York.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Benjamin J. Sweet, Esq. THE SWEET LAW FIRM, PC 1145 Bower Hill Road, Suite 104 Pittsburgh, PA 15243 Phone: (412) 857-5350 Email: ben@sweetlawpc.com - and - Jonathan D. Miller, Esq. NYE, STIRLING, HALE & MILLER, LLP 33 West Mission Street, Suite 201 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Phone: (805) 963-2345 Email: jonathan@nshmlaw.com TACOMBI HOLDING: Fischler Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Tacombi Holding NA, LLC. The case is styled as Brian Fischler Individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Tacombi Holding NA, LLC, Fonda Nolita, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-08473 (S.D. N.Y., Sept. 12, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Tacombi Holding Na, LLC (trade name Tacombi) is in the Mexican Restaurant business. Tacombi also covers Catering services; Restaurant and bar services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Douglas Brian Lipsky, Esq. Lipsky Lowe LLP 630 Third Avenue, Fifth Floor New York, NY 10017 Phone: (212) 392-4772 Fax: (212) 444-1030 Email: doug@lipskylowe.com TEXTRON INC: Pension Fund Sues over 11% Drop in Share Price ----------------------------------------------------------- BUILDING TRADES PENSION FUND OF WESTERN PENNSYLVANIA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. TEXTRON INC.; SCOTT C. DONNELLY; and FRANK T. CONNOR, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-07881 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 22, 2019) is a class action on behalf of all investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Textron common stock between January 31, 2018 and October 17, 2018, inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. According to the complaint, Textron is a global manufacturer and distributor of small aircrafts and recreational vehicles. On March 6, 2017, Textron expanded its recreational vehicle business through its $316 million acquisition of Arctic Cat Inc. ("Arctic Cat"). Upon the completion of this transaction, Arctic Cat became an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Textron. Arctic Cat designs and manufactures a variety of recreational vehicles, including all-terrain vehicles and snowmobiles. Arctic Cat revenues are generated through sales to independent dealers. When the deal closed in March 2017, Textron's Chief Executive Officer Scott Donnelly stated that the "addition of Arctic Cat to Textron Specialized Vehicles business instantly gives Textron a deeper product line for customers, greater potential for innovation, and introduces new sales opportunities for its worldwide dealer network." During the Class Period, Textron repeatedly touted Arctic Cat as an important growth business for the Company, reassuring investors about dealer demand, end market sales and earnings prospects for its Arctic Cat products. At the same time, Defendants failed to disclose that: (1) end market sales of Arctic Cat products were slowing, resulting in a massive glut of old Arctic Cat inventory on dealers' floors; (2) in order to clear out this old inventory, the Company provided significant price discounts, which negatively impacted Textron's earnings; and (3) as a result, Textron's positive statements about Arctic Cat's business, operations, and prospects lacked a reasonable basis. The truth about Arctic Cat's inventory problems was revealed on October 18, 2018, when Textron reported weak third quarter 2018 earnings and cut its full-year 2018 forecast. The Company blamed the shortfall on heavy discounts issued by Textron to clear out old inventory. Analysts immediately lowered their price targets on Textron stock citing the inventory concerns at Arctic Cat. On this news, Textron's stock fell $7.29 or 11.25%, to close at $57.49 on October 18, 2018, erasing $1.8 billion from its market capitalization. Textron Inc. is a global, multi-industry company with operations in aircraft, defense, industrial products, and finance. The Company's products include airplanes, helicopters, weapons, and automotive products. Textron's finance division offers asset based lending, aviation, distribution, golf, and resort finance, as well as structured capital. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Francis P. McConville, Esq. Christopher J. Keller, Esq. Eric J. Belfi, Esq. LABATON SUCHAROW LLP 140 Broadway New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 907-0700 Facsimile: (212) 818-0477 E-mails: ckeller@labaton.com ebelfi@labaton.com fmcconville@labaton.com THEVEGASPACKAGE.COM INC: Fisher Suit Asserts TCPA Breach -------------------------------------------------------- NICK FISHER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. THEVEGASPACKAGE.COM, INC., a Nevada corporation, and DOUGLAS DOUGLAS, an individual, Defendants, Case No. 2:19-cv-01613-JAD-VCF (D. Nev., Sept. 13, 2019) is a Class Action Complaint against Defendants to: (1) stop Defendants' practice of placing calls using an "automatic telephone dialing system" ("ATDS") to the cellular telephones of consumers nationwide without their prior express consent; and (2) obtain redress for all persons injured by Defendants' conduct. Plaintiff also seeks an award of statutory damages to the members of the Class, plus court costs and reasonable attorneys' fees. The complaint alleges that Defendants have violated, and continue to violate, the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and its regulations by placing autodialed calls to cellphone subscribers who have not given prior express consent to receiving such calls. By making the telephone calls at issue in this Complaint, Defendants caused Plaintiff and the members of the Class actual harm and cognizable legal injury. This includes the aggravation and nuisance and invasions of privacy that result from the receipt of such calls as well as a loss of value realized for any monies that consumers paid to their wireless carriers for the receipt of such calls, says the complaint. Plaintiff Fisher is a natural person and a citizen of the State of Arizona. Vegas Package is a purported vacation retail company that offers Las Vegas vacation packages to consumers.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Marc P. Cook, Esq. COOK & KELESIS, LTD. 517 S. 9th St. Las Vegas, NV 89101 Phone: (702) 737-7702 Fax: (702) 737-7712 Email: law@bckltd.com TITAN STAIRS & TRIM: Paul Files FLSA Suit in Utah ------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Titan Stairs & Trim. The case is styled as Nathaniel Paul on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Titan Stairs & Trim, Kendall D. Prisbrey, Kody Prisbrey, Defendants, Case No. 4:19-cv-00076-DN (D. Utah, Sept. 13, 2019). The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Titan Stairs & Trim, Inc. provides architectural products. The Company offers stairs, balustrades, wrought iron fabrication, architectural embellishments, carpentry, hardwood flooring, and other related products.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James M. Elegante, Esq. Matthew D. Ekins, Esq. GALLIAN WELKER & BECKSTROM LC 965 E 700 S., STE 305 ST GEORGE, UT 84790 Phone: (435) 628-1682 Email: jelegante@utahcase.com matt@utahcase.com TITLEMAX: Dougherty Files Suit Over Excessive Interest Rates ------------------------------------------------------------ CELINE DOUGHERTY, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. TITLEMAX OF CALIFORNIA, INC. d/b/a TITLEMAX, Defendant, Case No. 5:19-cv-01709 (C.D. Cal., Sept. 6, 2019) is a class action against Defendant for public injunctive relief to protect the consuming public in California, including potential customers of TitleMax, from the threat of future injury in terms of an excessive interest rate, and to obtain recompense for California consumers who take out personal loans from Defendant. According to the complaint, the Defendant TitleMax lends to consumers, including to California consumers, who have limited credit opportunities and provides funding to consumers subject to loan terms that most consumers are unable to repay in full. The result of this practice is that the vast majority of the loans made by TitleMax are essentially "interest only" loans and/or subject to default and additional penalties. TitleMax's business model is to charge usurious interest rates so that most consumers are locked into loans they cannot afford to repay, and instead the consumers end up repaying many times the face value of the loan without significantly reducing the principal balance owed. TitleMax's pernicious loan terms create a scenario where most consumers take out a loan in times of emergency only to find later that the loan is unable to be repaid within any reasonable time period. In many cases, consumers are unable to simply avoid default. As the loans progress, TitleMax reaps significant profits from its exorbitant interest and fees, while consumers are unable to tangibly decrease the principal balance. Once consumers fall into default, TitleMax compounds its profits by adding default interest and penalties and subsequently aggressively pursues collection efforts. On February 4, 2019, Plaintiff, Ms. Dougherty, entered into an Loan Agreement, Promissory Note and Security Agreement with Defendant, which provided that Defendant would loan $2,600 to Ms. Delisle at an APR of 181.67%. Ms. Dougherty had made several payments on the loan since the loans' inception. Therefore, Plaintiff incurred actual financial losses due to the exorbitant and unlawful interest rates charged by TitleMax. After Ms. Dougherty's husband passed away, she was unable to make the high interest payments. On August 29, 2019, TitleMax repossessed Ms. Dougherty's vehicle due to late payments, says the complaint. Plaintiff CELINE DOUGHERTY is an individual citizen and resident of the County of San Bernardino, State of California. TitleMax's primary business is offering short-term loans across the nation to low income borrowers with extreme interest rates.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Abbas Kazerounian, Esq. Jason A. Ibey, Esq. Nicholas R. Barthel, Esq. KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC 245 Fischer Avenue, Unit D1 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Phone: (800) 400-6808 Facsimile: (800) 520-5523 Email: ak@kazlg.com jason@kazlg.com nicholas@kazlg.com - and - Ahren A. Tiller, Esq. BLC LAW CENTER, APC 1230 Columbia Street, Suite 1100 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: (800) 492-4033 Facsimile: (866) 444-7026 Email: ahren.tiller@blc-sd.com TOP FLITE: Fabricant Sues Over Illegal Telemarketing Calls ---------------------------------------------------------- Terry Fabricant, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Top Flite Financial, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 19-cv-07232 (C.D. Cal., August 15, 2019), seeks injunctive relief, statutory damages, treble damages and all other relief for violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Top Flite Financial operates as a consumer loan company. It conducted telemarketing campaigns in order to promote its business. Fabricant claims to have received auto-dialed telemarketing calls on his phones. Fabricant's phone is registered in the National Do-Not-Call registry. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: John R. Habashy, Esq. LEXICON LAW, PC 633 W. Fifth St., 28th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: 213-233-5900 Fax: 888-373-2107 Email: john@lexiconlaw.com - and - Ryan M. Kelly, Esq. ANDERSON + WANCA 3701 Algonquin Road, Suite 500 Rolling Meadows, IL 60008 Telephone: (847) 368-1500 Fax: (847) 368-1501 Email: rkelly@andersonwanca.com TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS: Clark Sues over Debt Collection Practices ------------------------------------------------------------- TALIJAH M. CLARK, on behalf of himself and similarly situated consumers, the Plaintiff, vs. TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS INC., the Defendants, Case No. CAM-L-003544-19 (N.J. Sup., Sept. 5, 2019), seeks to recover damages arising from Defendant's violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The Plaintiff took out a private student loan for personal use. She became delinquent on the private student loan, according to the Defendant. On Oct. 15, 2018, the Defendant sent a letter to Plaintiff to collect the debt. The letter is false, deceptive and misleading, according to the Plaintiff. The letter listed the balance of $1,389.55 as due and owing. The Defendant broke this down into principal balance of $1,111.64 and a collection charge of $277.91. Plaintiff's agreement with the original creditor does not allow for interest to accrue, and Plaintiff's original creditor has not and will not seek interest from the Plaintiff.[BN] Attorneys for the Plaintiff are: Daniel Zemel, Esq. Nicholas Linker, Esq. ZEMEL LAW LLC 1373 Broad st., Suite 203C Clifton, NJ 07013 Telephone: 862 227 3106 E-mail: dz@zemellawllc.com TRINITY PROPERTIES: Fails to Pay Minimum and OT Wages, Brown Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- DAVID BROWN, TARA CROW, MARIO FOY, DENISE SCOTT, DON HARRIS, ASHLEY MOORE and TIMOTHY GREEN, Each Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. TRINITY PROPERTIES, LLC, Case No. 4:19-cv-00617-JM (E.D. Ark., Sept. 4, 2019), accuses the Defendant of violating the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act by failing to pay the Plaintiffs and all other hourly-paid employees a proper minimum wage and lawful overtime compensation for hours in excess of 40 hours per week. Trinity Properties, LLC, is an Arkansas company headquartered in Fort Smith. The Company operates apartment complexes throughout the United States.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: April Rheaume, Esq. Steve Rauls, Esq. Josh Sanford, Esq. SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC One Financial Center 650 South Shackleford Road, Suite 411 Little Rock, AR 72211 Telephone: (501) 221-0088 Facsimile: (888) 787-2040 E-mail: april@sanfordlawfirm.com steve@sanfordlawfirm.com josh@sanfordlawfirm.com UNITED STATES: Gatore's Class Cert. Bid Denied; Hearing on Oct. 11 ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Hon. Reggie B. Walton denied without prejudice six motions pending in the lawsuit titled RICA GATORE, et al. v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, Case No. 1:15-cv-00459-RBW (D.D.C.). In accordance with the Court's oral rulings issued at the status conference held on September 7, 2019, and in light of the parties' representation that their settlement discussions are ongoing, Judge Walton denied without prejudice the following motions: * Plaintiff Catholic Charities' Motion for Summary Judgment as to Eighth Cause of Action; * Catholic Charities' Motion for Class Certification; * Individual Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification Under Civil Rule 23(b)(3); * Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to Add 57 Plaintiffs to the Complaint, and to File that Amended Complaint; * Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Catholic Charities' Policy-or-Practice Claim; and * Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File Sur-Reply. The parties shall appear for a status conference on October 11, 2019, at 9:00 a.m., to update the Court regarding the status of their settlement discussions.[CC] UNIV 45: Leon et al Seek Unpaid Wages & OT for Market Employees --------------------------------------------------------------- BRIGIDO MERINO LEON, MAXIMO MARTINEZ RAMIREZ, and RICARDO RAMIREZ HERNANDEZ, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. UNIV 45 FRUIT & VEGETABLE CORP. (D/B/A EPICUREAN MARKET), 45 UNIVERSITY PLACE CORP. (D/B/A EPICUREAN MARKET), JAMES CHO, and SOOK J. MIN, the Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-08266 (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 5, 2019), seeks unpaid minimum and overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and New York Labor Law. The Plaintiffs are former employees of Defendants which own, operate, or control a market, located at 45 University Place, New York, New York 10003 under the name "Epicurean Market." The Plaintiffs were employed as flower arrangers, grill helpers and cooks at the market. They worked for Defendants in excess of 40 hours per week, without appropriate minimum wage, overtime, and spread of hour's compensation for the hours that they worked. Rather, the Defendants failed to maintain accurate record-keeping of the hours worked and failed to pay Plaintiffs appropriately for any hours worked, either at the straight rate of pay or for any additional overtime premium, the lawsuit says.[BN] Attorneys for the Plaintiffs are: Michael Faillace, Esq. MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510 New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 317-1200 Facsimile: (212) 317-1620 E-mail: Faillace@employmentcompliance.com VILLAGE NATURAL: Hernandez Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages ------------------------------------------------------------------- MARTIN FLORES HERNANDEZ, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. VILLAGE NATURAL RESTAURANT CORP. (D/B/A VILLAGE NATURAL), LAI THUY QUACH, and LARRY CHUY (A.K.A. MR. LARRY), Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-08378 (E.D. N.Y., Sept. 9, 2019) seeks unpaid minimum and overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, and for violations of the N.Y. Labor Law, and the "spread of hours" and overtime wage orders of the New York Commissioner of Labor, including applicable liquidated damages, interest, attorneys' fees and costs. Plaintiff Flores worked for Defendants in excess of 40 hours per week, without appropriate minimum wage, overtime, and spread of hours compensation for the hours that he worked, says the complaint. Defendants also failed to maintain accurate recordkeeping of the hours worked and failed to pay Plaintiff Flores appropriately for any hours worked, either at the straight rate of pay or for any additional overtime premium; and failed to pay Plaintiff the required "spread of hours" pay for any day in which he had to work over 10 hours a day. The complaint alleges that Defendants employed the policy and practice of disguising Plaintiff's actual duties in payroll records by designating him as a delivery worker instead of as a non-tipped employee. This allowed Defendants to avoid paying Plaintiff at the minimum wage rate and enabled them to pay him at the tip-credit rate (which they still failed to do). In addition, Defendants maintained a policy and practice of unlawfully appropriating Plaintiff's and other tipped employees' tips and made unlawful deductions from Plaintiff's and other tipped employees' wages, says the complaint. Plaintiff Flores was employed as a delivery worker at the Defendants' restaurant. Defendants own, operate, or control a restaurant, located at 64 Greenwich Ave., New York, New York 10011 under the name "Village Natural".[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Faillace, Esq. MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510 New York, NY 10165 Phone: (212) 317-1200 Facsimile: (212) 317-1620 WESTAT INC: Villamont Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. --------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Westat, Inc. The case is styled as Michael Villamont, on behalf of all others similarly situated, and all agrieved employees, Plaintiff v. Westat, Inc., Does 1-100, Defendants, Case No. 34-2019-00264440-CU-OE-GDS (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Sept. 12, 2019). The case type is stated as "Other Employment". Westat is an employee-owned professional services corporation located in Rockville, Maryland, USA. Westat provides research services to agencies of the U.S. Government, as well as businesses, foundations, and state and local governments.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by Eric A Grover, Esq. Asbestos Litigation ASBESTOS UPDATE: 6,335 Bendix Claims Still Pending at June 30 ------------------------------------------------------------- Garrett Motion Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2019, that there are 6,335 unresolved asbestos claims related to the Bendix legacy Honeywell business at June 30, 2019. The Company also reported that within the six months ended June 30, 2019, there were 1,291 new claims filed and 1,165 claims resolved. As previously reported, Garrett Motion Inc. became an independent publicly-traded company on October 1, 2018 through a pro rata distribution by Honeywell International Inc. of 100% of the then-outstanding shares of Garrett to Honeywell's stockholders (the "Spin-Off"). The Company states, "For the periods prior to the Spin-Off, these Consolidated and Combined Interim Financial Statements reflect an estimated liability for resolution of pending and future asbestos-related and environmental liabilities primarily related to the Bendix legacy Honeywell business, calculated as if we were responsible for 100% of the Bendix asbestos-liability payments. However, this recognition model differs from the recognition model applied subsequent to the Spin-Off. In periods subsequent to the Spin-Off, the accounting for the majority of our asbestos-related liability payments and accounts payable reflect the terms of the Indemnification and Reimbursement Agreement with Honeywell entered into on September 12, 2018, under which we are required to make payments to Honeywell in amounts equal to 90% of Honeywell's asbestos-related liability payments and accounts payable, primarily related to the Bendix business in the United States, as well as certain environmental-related liability payments and accounts payable and non-United States asbestos-related liability payments and accounts payable, in each case related to legacy elements of the Business, including the legal costs of defending and resolving such liabilities, less 90% of Honeywell's net insurance receipts and, as may be applicable, certain other recoveries associated with such liabilities. The Indemnification and Reimbursement Agreement provides that the agreement will terminate upon the earlier of (x) December 31, 2048 or (y) December 31st of the third consecutive year during which certain amounts owed to Honeywell during each such year were less than US$25 million as converted into Euros in accordance with the terms of the agreement." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://is.gd/YAUnNH ASBESTOS UPDATE: BNSF Accrues $308MM for PI Matters at June 30 -------------------------------------------------------------- Burlington Northern Santa Fe, LLC ("BNSF") has accrued US$308 million at June 30, 2019, for personal injury matters, which include asbestos claims, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2019. The Company states, "BNSF's personal injury liability includes the cost of claims for employee work-related injuries, third-party claims, and asbestos claims. BNSF records a liability for asserted and unasserted claims when the expected loss is both probable and reasonably estimable. Because of the uncertainty of the timing of future payments, the liability is undiscounted. Defense and processing costs, which are recorded on an as-reported basis, are not included in the recorded liability. Expense accruals and adjustments are classified as materials and other in the Consolidated Statements of Income. "Personal injury claims by BNSF Railway employees are subject to the provisions of the Federal Employers' Liability Act (FELA) rather than state workers' compensation laws. Resolution of these cases under the FELA's fault-based system requires either a finding of fault by a jury or an out of court settlement. Third-party claims include claims by non-employees for compensatory damages and may, from time to time, include requests for punitive damages or treatment of the claim as a class action. "BNSF estimates its personal injury liability claims and expense using standard actuarial methodologies based on the covered population, activity levels and trends in frequency and the costs of covered injuries. The Company monitors actual experience against the forecasted number of claims to be received, the forecasted number of claims closing with payment, and expected claim payments and records adjustments as new events or changes in estimates develop. "BNSF is party to asbestos claims by employees and non-employees who may have been exposed to asbestos. Because of the relatively finite exposed population, the Company has recorded an estimate for the full amount of probable exposure. This is determined through an actuarial analysis based on estimates of the exposed population, the number of claims likely to be filed, the number of claims that will likely require payment, and the cost per claim. Estimated filing and dismissal rates and average cost per claim are determined utilizing recent claim data and trends. "The amount recorded by the Company for the personal injury liability is based upon the best information currently available. Because of the uncertainty surrounding the ultimate outcome of personal injury claims, it is reasonably possible that future costs to resolve these claims may be different from the recorded amounts. The Company estimates that costs to resolve the liability may range from approximately US$270 million to US$375 million. "Although the final outcome of these personal injury matters cannot be predicted with certainty, it is the opinion of BNSF that none of these items, when finally resolved, will have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial position or liquidity. However, the occurrence of a number of these items in the same period could have a material adverse effect on the results of operations in a particular quarter or fiscal year." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://is.gd/0FZGm6 ASBESTOS UPDATE: CECONY Accrues $7MM Liability at June 30 --------------------------------------------------------- Consolidated Edison, Inc.'s subsidiary Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. (CECONY) had accrued liability of US$7 million for asbestos suits at June 30, 2019, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2019. CECONY also deferred US$7 million as regulatory assets related to asbestos suits at June 30, 2019. A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://is.gd/xSgpkv ASBESTOS UPDATE: Con Edison Accrues $8MM Liability at June 30 ------------------------------------------------------------- Consolidated Edison, Inc. had accrued liability of US$8 million for asbestos suits at June 30, 2019, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2019. The Company also deferred US$8 million as regulatory assets related to asbestos suits at June 30, 2019. The Company states: "Suits have been brought in New York State and federal courts against the Utilities and many other defendants, wherein a large number of plaintiffs sought large amounts of compensatory and punitive damages for deaths and injuries allegedly caused by exposure to asbestos at various premises of the Utilities. The suits that have been resolved, which are many, have been resolved without any payment by the Utilities, or for amounts that were not, in the aggregate, material to them. The amounts specified in all the remaining thousands of suits total billions of dollars; however, the Utilities believe that these amounts are greatly exaggerated, based on the disposition of previous claims. "At June 30, 2019, Con Edison and CECONY have accrued their estimated aggregate undiscounted potential liabilities for these suits and additional suits that may be brought over the next 15 years as shown in the following table. These estimates were based upon a combination of modeling, historical data analysis and risk factor assessment. Courts have begun, and unless otherwise determined on appeal may continue, to apply different standards for determining liability in asbestos suits than the standard that applied historically. As a result, the Companies currently believe that there is a reasonable possibility of an exposure to loss in excess of the liability accrued for the suits. The Companies are unable to estimate the amount or range of such loss. "In addition, certain current and former employees have claimed or are claiming workers' compensation benefits based on alleged disability from exposure to asbestos. CECONY is permitted to defer as regulatory assets (for subsequent recovery through rates) costs incurred for its asbestos lawsuits and workers' compensation claims." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://is.gd/xSgpkv ASBESTOS UPDATE: Cox Suit Placed Under Mediation ------------------------------------------------ Judge James C. Dever of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina denies without prejudice all pending motions in the case entitled Jack Howard Cox, Sr., Craig Michael Cox, and Valerie M. Cox, Co-Executors of Estate of Percy Ray Cox, Deceased and Charlotte Cox, Individually, Plaintiffs, v. AGCO Corporation, et al., Defendants, No. 4:16-CV-84-D, (E.D. N.C.). Judge Dever directs the parties to participate in a court-hosted mediation with U.S. Magistrate Judge Gates. If the parties are unable to resolve the case, each party will advise the court which motions need resolution, and only then will the court resolve the relevant motion on the merits. A copy of the Order dated Aug. 20, 2019, is available at https://tinyurl.com/yxgsnvu5 from Leagle.com. Jack Howard Cox, Sr., Executor of the Estate of Percy Ray Cox, Dec., Plaintiff, represented by Audrey Snyder , Ward Black Law, Benjamin D. Braly -- bbraly@dobllp.com -- Dean Omar Branham LLP, Sabrina G. Stone , Dean Omar Branham LLP, Kevin W. Paul -- kpaul@dobllp.com -- Dean Omar Branham, LLP & Janet Ward Black , Ward Black Law. Borg-Warner Morse Tec, Inc., successor in interest to Borg-Warner Corporation, Defendant, represented by David L. Levy -- dlevy@hedrickgardner.com -- Hedrick Gardner Kincheloe & Garofalo LLP, Kelvin T. Wyles -- kelvin.wyles@dentons.com -- Dentons US LLP, Lisa L. Oberg -- Lisa.Oberg@dentons.com -- Dentons US LLP & Jon S. Player , Hedrick, Gardner, Kincheloe & Garofalo, LLP. Ford Motor Company, Defendant, represented by Christopher R. Kiger -- ckiger@smithlaw.com -- Smith, Anderson, Blount, Dorsett, Mitchell & Jernigan, LLP, Kirk G. Warner -- kwarner@smithlaw.com -- Smith, Anderson, Blount, Dorsett, Mitchell & Jernigan, LLP & Addie K.S. Ries -- aries@smithlaw.com -- Smith, Anderson, Blount, Dorsett, Mitchell & Jernigan, LLP. Honeywell International, Inc., individually and as successor in interest to the Bendix Corporation formerly known as AlliedSignal, Inc., Defendant, represented by H. Lee Davis, Jr. -- ldavis@davisandhamrick.com -- Davis & Hamrick, LLP. Maremont Corporation, Defendant, represented by Carter T. Lambeth , Carter T. Lambeth Attorney, P.C. & William P. Early , Pierce Herns Sloan and Wilson LLC. Navistar, Inc., successor in interest to International Harvester Company formerly known as International Truck and Engine Corporation, Defendant, represented by Robert O. Meriwether -- robert.meriwether@nelsonmullins.com -- Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, Tracy E. Tomlin -- tracy.tomlin@nelsonmullins.com -- Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough LLP, Travis Andrew Bustamante -- travis.bustamante@nelsonmullins.com -- Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP & William Michael Starr -- bill.starr@nelsonmullins.com -- Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP. Pneumo Abex LLC, successor in interest to Abex Corporation, Defendant, represented by Timothy W. Bouch , Bouch McLeod LLC. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Crane Co. Had 28,851 Pending Claims at June 30 --------------------------------------------------------------- Crane Co. has 28,851 pending asbestos-related claims as of June 30, 2019, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2019. The Company states, "Of the 28,851 pending claims as of June 30, 2019, approximately 18,000 claims were pending in New York, approximately 100 claims were pending in Texas, approximately 300 claims were pending in Mississippi, and approximately 200 claims were pending in Ohio, all jurisdictions in which legislation or judicial orders restrict the types of claims that can proceed to trial on the merits. "We have tried several cases resulting in defense verdicts by the jury or directed verdicts for the defense by the court. We further have pursued appeals of certain adverse jury verdicts that have resulted in reversals in favor of the defense." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://is.gd/dQYzxX ASBESTOS UPDATE: Curtiss-Wright Still Defends Suits at June 30 -------------------------------------------------------------- Curtiss-Wright Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2019, that to date, the Company has not been found liable or paid any material sum of money in settlement in any case. The Company states, "We have been named in pending lawsuits that allege injury from exposure to asbestos. To date, we have not been found liable or paid any material sum of money in settlement in any case. We believe that the minimal use of asbestos in our past operations as well as our acquired businesses and the relatively non-friable condition of asbestos in our historical products make it unlikely that we will face material liability in any asbestos litigation, whether individually or in the aggregate. We maintain insurance coverage and indemnification agreements for these potential liabilities and we believe adequate coverage exists to cover any unanticipated asbestos liability." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://is.gd/u4e5cL ASBESTOS UPDATE: Diamond Offshore Still Faces Suits at June 30 -------------------------------------------------------------- Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. is still a defendant in asbestos-related lawsuits pending in Louisiana state courts, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2019. The Company states, "We are one of several unrelated defendants in lawsuits filed in Louisiana state courts alleging that defendants manufactured, distributed or utilized drilling mud containing asbestos and, in our case, allowed such drilling mud to have been utilized aboard our drilling rigs. The plaintiffs seek, among other things, an award of unspecified compensatory and punitive damages. The manufacture and use of asbestos-containing drilling mud had already ceased before we acquired any of the drilling rigs addressed in these lawsuits. We believe that we are not liable for the damages asserted in the lawsuits pursuant to the terms of our 1989 asset purchase agreement with Diamond M Corporation. We are unable to estimate our potential exposure, if any, to these lawsuits at this time but do not believe that our ultimate liability, if any, resulting from this litigation will have a material effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of operations or cash flows." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://is.gd/Y7ordV ASBESTOS UPDATE: Harsco Corp. Had 17,131 PI Suits at June 30 ------------------------------------------------------------ Harsco Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2019, that there were approximately 17,131 pending asbestos personal injury actions filed against the Company at June 30, 2019. Harsco Corp. states, "The Company is named as one of many defendants (approximately 90 or more in most cases) in legal actions in the U.S. alleging personal injury from exposure to airborne asbestos over the past several decades. In their suits, the plaintiffs have named as defendants, among others, many manufacturers, distributors and installers of numerous types of equipment or products that allegedly contained asbestos. "The Company believes that the claims against it are without merit. The Company has never been a producer, manufacturer or processor of asbestos fibers. Any asbestos-containing part of a Company product used in the past was purchased from a supplier and the asbestos encapsulated in other materials such that airborne exposure, if it occurred, was not harmful and is not associated with the types of injuries alleged in the pending actions. "At June 30, 2019, there were approximately 17,131 pending asbestos personal injury actions filed against the Company. Of those actions, approximately 16,582 were filed in the New York Supreme Court (New York County), approximately 118 were filed in other New York State Supreme Court Counties and approximately 431 were filed in courts located in other states. "The complaints in most of those actions generally follow a form that contains a standard damages demand of US$20 million or US$25 million, regardless of the individual plaintiff's alleged medical condition, and without identifying any specific Company product. "At June 30, 2019, approximately 16,550 of the actions filed in New York Supreme Court (New York County) were on the Deferred/Inactive Docket created by the court in December 2002 for all pending and future asbestos actions filed by persons who cannot demonstrate that they have a malignant condition or discernible physical impairment. The remaining approximately 32 cases in New York County are pending on the Active or In Extremis Docket created for plaintiffs who can demonstrate a malignant condition or physical impairment. "The Company has liability insurance coverage under various primary and excess policies that the Company believes will be available, if necessary, to substantially cover any liability that might ultimately be incurred in the asbestos actions. The costs and expenses of the asbestos actions are being paid by the Company's insurers. "In view of the persistence of asbestos litigation in the U.S., the Company expects to continue to receive additional claims in the future. The Company intends to continue its practice of vigorously defending these claims and cases. At June 30, 2019, the Company has obtained dismissal in approximately 28,200 cases by stipulation or summary judgment prior to trial. "It is not possible to predict the ultimate outcome of asbestos-related actions in the U.S. due to the unpredictable nature of this litigation, and no loss provision has been recorded in the Company's condensed consolidated financial statements because a loss contingency is not deemed probable or estimable. Despite this uncertainty, and although results of operations and cash flows for a given period could be adversely affected by asbestos-related actions, the Company does not expect that any costs that are reasonably possible to be incurred by the Company in connection with asbestos litigation would have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition, results of operations or cash flows." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://is.gd/Kbw1hP ASBESTOS UPDATE: ITT Still Obliged to Indemnify Xylem at June 30 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Xylem Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2019, that ITT Corporation (now ITT LLC) remains obligated to indemnify the Company from liabilities associated with asbestos matters. The Company states, "From time to time claims may be asserted against Xylem alleging injury caused by any of our products resulting from asbestos exposure. We believe there are numerous legal defenses available for such claims and would defend ourselves vigorously. Pursuant to the Distribution Agreement among ITT Corporation (now ITT LLC), Exelis and Xylem, ITT Corporation (now ITT LLC) has an obligation to indemnify, defend and hold Xylem harmless for asbestos product liability matters, including settlements, judgments, and legal defense costs associated with all pending and future claims that may arise from past sales of ITT's legacy products. We believe ITT Corporation (now ITT LLC) remains a substantial entity with sufficient financial resources to honor its obligations to us. "As part of our 2011 spin-off from our former parent, ITT Corporation (now ITT LLC), Exelis Inc. and Xylem will indemnify, defend and hold harmless each of the other parties with respect to such parties' assumed or retained liabilities under the Distribution Agreement and breaches of the Distribution Agreement or related spin agreements. The former parent's indemnification obligations include asserted and unasserted asbestos and silica liability claims that relate to the presence or alleged presence of asbestos or silica in products manufactured, repaired or sold prior to October 31, 2011, the Distribution Date, subject to limited exceptions with respect to certain employee claims, or in the structure or material of any building or facility, subject to exceptions with respect to employee claims relating to Xylem buildings or facilities. The indemnification associated with pending and future asbestos claims does not expire. Xylem has not recorded a liability for material matters for which we expect to be indemnified by the former parent or Exelis Inc. through the Distribution Agreement and we are not aware of any claims or other circumstances that would give rise to material payments from us under such indemnifications. "On May 29, 2015, Harris Inc. acquired Exelis. As the parent of Exelis, Harris Inc. is responsible for Exelis' indemnification obligations under the Distribution Agreement." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://is.gd/1MYFPR ASBESTOS UPDATE: J&J Talc Bottle Contained Asbestos, Expert Says ---------------------------------------------------------------- Law360 reported that an electron microscopist told a California jury that his laboratory found asbestos in a bottle of Johnson & Johnson baby powder owner by a woman who is alleging the company's talc products gave her mesothelioma. During the second week of the trial in Torrance, California, plaintiff Carolyn Weirick called to the stand expert witness William Longo, a material scientist and electron microscopist who is the president of Georgia-based Materials Analytical Services. Longo saw his methods attacked by J&J during opening statements of the trial, which is the second in the case after a mistrial last year. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Magnetek Has $864,000 Liability at June 30 ----------------------------------------------------------- Columbus McKinnon Corporation's subsidiary, Magnetek, recorded approximately US$864,000 for asbestos-related liability as of June 30, 2019, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2019. The Company states, "Magnetek has been named, along with multiple other defendants, in asbestos-related lawsuits associated with business operations previously acquired but which are no longer owned. During Magnetek's ownership, none of the businesses produced or sold asbestos-containing products. For such claims, Magnetek is uninsured and either contractually indemnified against liability, or contractually obligated to defend and indemnify the purchaser of these former business operations. The Company aggressively seeks dismissal from these proceedings. Based on actuarial information, the asbestos-related liability including legal costs is estimated to be approximately US$864,000 which has been reflected as a liability in the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet at June 30, 2019." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://is.gd/Yb5f9T ASBESTOS UPDATE: Navistar Continues to Defend Claims at July 31 --------------------------------------------------------------- Navistar International Corporation is still facing asbestos claims related to its facilities and older vehicle models, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended July 31, 2019. The Company states, "Along with other vehicle manufacturers, we have been subject to an increased number of asbestos-related claims in recent years. In general, these claims relate to illnesses alleged to have resulted from asbestos exposure from component parts found in older vehicles, although some cases relate to the alleged presence of asbestos in our facilities. In these claims, we are generally not the sole defendant, and the claims name as defendants numerous manufacturers and suppliers of a wide variety of products allegedly containing asbestos. "We have strongly disputed these claims, and it has been our policy to defend against them vigorously. Historically, the actual damages paid out to claimants have not been material in any year to our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. It is possible that the number of these claims will continue to grow, and that the costs for resolving asbestos related claims could become significant in the future." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://is.gd/FRchNu ASBESTOS UPDATE: Owens-Illinois Defends 1,020 Suits at June 30 -------------------------------------------------------------- Owens-Illinois, Inc. had approximately 1,020 asbestos lawsuits pending as of June 30, 2019, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2019. The Company states, "From 1948 to 1958, one of the Company's former business units commercially produced and sold approximately US$40 million of a high-temperature, calcium-silicate based pipe and block insulation material containing asbestos. The Company sold its insulation business unit in April 1958. The Company receives claims from individuals alleging bodily injury and death as a result of exposure to asbestos from this product ("Asbestos Claims"). Some Asbestos Claims are brought as personal injury lawsuits that typically allege various theories of liability, including negligence, gross negligence and strict liability and seek compensatory and, in some cases, punitive damages. "Predominantly, however, Asbestos Claims are presented to the Company under administrative claims-handling agreements, which the Company has in place with many plaintiffs' counsel throughout the country ("Administrative Claims"). Administrative Claims require evaluation and negotiation regarding whether particular claimants qualify under the criteria established by the related claims-handling agreements. The criteria for Administrative Claims include verification of a compensable illness and a reasonable probability of exposure to a product manufactured by the Company's former business unit during its manufacturing period ending in 1958. Plaintiffs' counsel present, and the Company negotiates, Administrative Claims under these various agreements in differing quantities, at different times, and under a variety of conditions. "As of June 30, 2019, the Company had approximately 1,020 asbestos lawsuits pending. These pending lawsuits do not include an estimate of potential Administrative Claims that may be presented under a claims-handling agreement due to the uncertainties around presentation timing, quantities, or qualification rates. The Company considers Administrative Claims to be filed and disposed when they are accepted for payment." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://is.gd/Pndczo ASBESTOS UPDATE: Rexnord Corp. Still Faces Stearns PI Lawsuits -------------------------------------------------------------- Rexnord Corporation still faces multiple lawsuits relating to personal injuries due to the alleged presence of asbestos in certain brakes and clutches by the Company's Stearns division, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2019. The Company states, "Multiple lawsuits (with approximately 300 claimants) are pending in state or federal court in numerous jurisdictions relating to alleged personal injuries due to the alleged presence of asbestos in certain brakes and clutches previously manufactured by the Company's Stearns division and/or its predecessor owners. Invensys and FMC, prior owners of the Stearns business, have paid 100% of the costs to date related to the Stearns lawsuits. "In connection with its sale, Invensys plc ("Invensys") provided the Company with indemnification against certain contingent liabilities, including certain pre-closing environmental liabilities. The Company believes that, pursuant to such indemnity obligations, Invensys is obligated to defend and indemnify the Company with respect to the matters relating to the Ellsworth Industrial Park Site and to various asbestos claims. The indemnity obligations relating to the matters are subject, together with indemnity obligations relating to other matters, to an overall dollar cap equal to the purchase price, which is an amount in excess of US$900 million." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://is.gd/HfLfz3 ASBESTOS UPDATE: Rogers Corp. Had $70.8MM Liabilities at June 30 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Rogers Corporation disclosed in its press release dated July 31, 2019, that it has total asbestos-related liabilities of US$70,773,000 and total asbestos-related insurance receivables of US$‭64,385‬,000 as of June 30, 2019. Of the US$70,773,000 asbestos liabilities, US$5,547,000 is recorded in current liabilities and US$65,226,000 in non-current portion. Of the US$‭64,385‬,000 asbestos insurance receivables, US$4,138,000 is recorded as current portion and US$60,247,000 as non-current portion. A full-text copy of the Company's July 31, 2019 Press Release is available at https://is.gd/kUyCem ASBESTOS UPDATE: Roper Tech, Units Still Defend Suits at June 30 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Roper Technologies, Inc., and its subsidiaries continue to be named defendants along with numerous industrial companies in asbestos-related litigation claims in certain U.S. states, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2019. The Company states, "No significant resources have been required by Roper to respond to these cases and Roper believes it has valid defenses to such claims and, if required, intends to defend them vigorously. Given the state of these claims, it is not possible to determine the potential liability, if any." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://is.gd/8YTXry ASBESTOS UPDATE: SPX Had $556.7MM Asbestos Liability at June 29 --------------------------------------------------------------- SPX Corporation recorded US$556.7 million for asbestos product liability matters at June 29, 2019, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended June 29, 2019. The Company states, "Numerous claims, complaints and proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business have been asserted or are pending against us or certain of our subsidiaries (collectively, "claims"). These claims relate to litigation matters (e.g., class actions and contracts, intellectual property, and competitive claims), environmental matters, product liability matters (predominately associated with alleged exposure to asbestos-containing materials), and other risk management matters (e.g., general liability, automobile, and workers' compensation claims). Additionally, we may become subject to other claims of which we are currently unaware, which may be significant, or the claims of which we are aware may result in our incurring significantly greater loss than we anticipate. While we (and our subsidiaries) maintain property, cargo, auto, product, general liability, environmental, and directors' and officers' liability insurance and have acquired rights under similar policies in connection with acquisitions that we believe cover a significant portion of these claims, this insurance may be insufficient or unavailable (e.g., in the case of insurer insolvency) to protect us against potential loss exposures. Also, while we believe we are entitled to indemnification from third parties for some of these claims, these rights may be insufficient or unavailable to protect us against potential loss exposures. "Our recorded liabilities related to these matters totaled US$600.9 million (including US$556.7 million for asbestos product liability matters) and US$631.7 million (including US$587.5 million for asbestos product liability matters) at June 29, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively. Of these amounts, US$573.2 million and US$600.3 million are included in "Other long-term liabilities" within our condensed consolidated balance sheets at June 29, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively, with the remainder included in "Accrued expenses." The liabilities we record for these claims are based on a number of assumptions, including historical claims and payment experience and, with respect to asbestos claims, actuarial estimates of the future period during which additional claims are reasonably foreseeable. While we base our assumptions on facts currently known to us, they entail inherently subjective judgments and uncertainties. As a result, our current assumptions for estimating these liabilities may not prove accurate, and we may be required to adjust these liabilities in the future, which could result in charges to earnings. These variances relative to current expectations could have a material impact on our financial position and results of operations. "We have recorded insurance recovery assets associated with the asbestos product liability matters, with such amounts totaling US$516.4 million and US$541.9 million at June 29, 2019 and December 31, 2018, respectively, and included in "Other assets" within our condensed consolidated balance sheets. These assets represent amounts that we believe we are or will be entitled to recover under agreements we have with insurance companies. The assets we record for these insurance recoveries are based on a number of assumptions, including the continued solvency of the insurers, and are subject to a variety of uncertainties. Our current assumptions for estimating these assets may not prove accurate, and we may be required to adjust these assets in the future, which could result in additional charges to earnings. These variances relative to current expectations could have a material impact on our financial position and results of operations." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://is.gd/es6AkI ********* S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA. Rousel Elaine T. Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche A. Castillon, Julie Anne L. Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors. Copyright 2019. All rights reserved. ISSN 1525-2272. This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior written permission of the publishers. Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but is not guaranteed. The CAR subscription rate is $775 for six months delivered via e-mail. Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof are $25 each. For subscription information, contact Peter A. Chapman at 215-945-7000. *** End of Transmission ***