/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/240115.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Monday, January 15, 2024, Vol. 26, No. 11
Headlines
3M COMPANY: Gregory Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Foams & Chemicals
3M COMPANY: Harris Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Iveson Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Kennedy Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Koerner Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Kritner Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals
600 NORTH AKARD: Collective Action Certification Sought
AETNA LIFE: Bid for Leave to File Class Cert Opposition OK'd
AGEX THERAPEUTICS: Buttner Balks at Merger Deal With Serina
APPLE INC: Starts Paying Suit Settlement Over Defective Batteries
ARIZONA BEVERAGES: Class Cert Bid Filing Modified to April 1, 2024
AT & T: Blum Lawsuit Removed from State Court to W.D. Louisiana
ATHENA COSMETICS: Markoff Sues Over Unfair and Deceptive Sale
ATHENA COSMETICS: Slattery Sues Over False and Misleading Sale
BANK OF AMERICA: Agrees to Settle Transfer Fees' Class Suit for $8M
CAMERON MEMORIAL: Doe Lawsuit Removed from Super. Ct. to N.D. Ind.
CELLCO PARTNERSHIP: Settles Administrative Charges Suit for $100M
CENTRAL GARDEN: Graham Has Until May 15 to File Class Cert Bid
CHARLOTTE, NC: Durham Seeks More Time to File Opposition Response
CIRCULAR BOARD: Bids to Dismiss Racial Discrimination Class Suit
COLUMBIA RECYCLING: Plaintiffs Seeks to Distribute Notice
CONSUMER SAFETY: Faces Mallory Class Suit Over Breach of Contract
DETROIT, MI: Faces High-Volume Customers' Water Rates Class Suit
DRIVER PROVIDER: Salazar Bid for Certification of Claims Tossed
DUNKIN DONUTS: Faces Class Suit Over Hidden Automatic Surcharge
ESO SOLUTIONS: Faces Class Suit Over Alleged Data Breach
EXELA TECHNOLOGIES: Court OK's Settlement in Shen Suit
FORWARD BANK: Fails to Safeguard Customers' Info, Hamilton Claims
FRED HUTCHINSON: Fails to Protect Patients' Info, Doe Suit Alleges
INDEBTED USA: McKee Files FDCPA Suit in W.D. North Carolina
INSIGNIA FINANCIAL: Court Dismisses Shareholders' Class Suit
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS: Faces Brawner Class Suit in S.D.N.Y.
JNJ LOGISTICS: Fails to Pay Drivers' Minimum, OT Wages Under FLSA
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Court Certifies Class Suit Over Talc Disclosures
KIA AMERICA: Seeks To File Docs Under Seal in Sanchez Lawsuit
MASTERBRAND INC: De Vejar Suit Moved from Super. Ct. to C.D. Cal.
MINERVA RESOURCES: Faces Pertrorock Suit Over Securities Fraud
NISSAN MOTOR: Doe Lawsuit Removed from Cir. Ct. to W.D. Missouri
ORANGE COUNTY, NY: Faces O'Hara Class Lawsuit in S.D. New York
PACIFIC OFFICE: Canfield Lawsuit Removed from Sup. Ct. to S.D. Cal.
POSTMEDS INC: Faces Moran Class Action Lawsuit in N.D. California
PRESSLER FELT: Kamal Files FDCPA Suit in S.D. New York
PRIME COMMS RETAIL: Lewis-Joyner Suit Removed to C.D. California
PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE: Thompson Moved from Jud. Cir. to S.D. Ill.
REID HOSPITAL: Doe Lawsuit Removed from Super. Ct. to S.D. Indiana
RESTORATION HARDWARE: Azimi Suit Moved from Super. Ct. to C.D. Cal.
SAN FRANCISCO, CA: Undergoes Transportation Overhaul as Settlement
SELECT REHAB: Plaintiffs Seek to File Third Amended Complaint
TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS: Greenhut Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York
UNITED BEHAVIORAL: LD Seeks to File Renewed Class Cert Bid
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS: Martinez Sues Over Discriminatory Employment
VICTORIA'S SECRET: Salazar Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
VICTORINOX SWISS ARMY: Calcano Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
VIOLET HOLDINGS: Woolbright Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
VORNADO AIR LLC: McKelley Files Suit in D. South Carolina
WELLARD LIMITED: Settles Shareholders' Class Action Suit for $23M
WEST SIDE LENDING: Sullivan Files Suit in D. Arizona
WESTLAKE CITY, OH: Fails to Pay Dispatchers' OT Wages Under FLSA
WESTLAKE PORTFOLIO: Bolton Files FDCPA Suit in C.D. California
WINE WAY INC: Zelvin Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
*********
3M COMPANY: Gregory Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Foams & Chemicals
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dennis Gregory, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), WILLFIRE HC
LLC, d/b/a WILLLIAMS FIRE & HAZARD CONTROL, Case No.
2:23-cv-05785-RMG (D.S.C., Nov. 9, 2023), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with
Ulcerative Colitis as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Scott M. Hendler, Esq.
HENDLER FLORES LAW, PLLC
901 S. MoPac Expressway
Bldg. 1, Ste 300
Austin, TX 78746
Phone: (512) 439-3202
Fax: (512) 439-3201
Email: shendler@hendlerlaw.com
3M COMPANY: Harris Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Edward Harris, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY
(f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA,
INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION;
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.;
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA,
INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a
DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM,
INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTSLP, as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No. 2:23-cv-05677-RMG (D.S.C., Nov. 6,
2023), is brought for damages for personal injury resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory
and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to
AFFF in training and during Plaintiff's working career in the
military and/or as a civilian and was diagnosed with prostate
cancer as a result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglass A. Kreis, Esq.
Bryan F. Aylstock, Esq.
Justin G. Witkin, Esq.
AYLSTOCK, WITKIN, KREIS & OVERHOLTZ, PLLC
17 East Main Street, Suite 200
Pensacola, FL 32502
Phone: (850) 202-1010
Email: dkreis@awkolaw.com
baylstock@awkolaw.com
jwitkin@awkolaw.com
3M COMPANY: Iveson Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Robin Iveson, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), WILLFIRE HC
LLC, d/b/a WILLLIAMS FIRE & HAZARD CONTROL, Case No.
2:23-cv-05788-RMG (D.S.C., Nov. 9, 2023), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with
prostate cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Scott M. Hendler, Esq.
HENDLER FLORES LAW, PLLC
901 S. MoPac Expressway
Bldg. 1, Ste 300
Austin, TX 78746
Phone: (512) 439-3202
Fax: (512) 439-3201
Email: shendler@hendlerlaw.com
3M COMPANY: Kennedy Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
-------------------------------------------------------------
Larry D. Kennedy, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S.,
INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.;
CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.
(f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS
AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC;
HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.; KIDDE PLC; LION GROUP, INC.;
MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., LLC;
MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.; RAYTHEON
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.;
THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS L.P. as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.); and W.L.GORE & ASSOCIATES, INC., Case No.
2:23-cv-05619-RMG (D.S.C., Nov. 3, 2023), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. TOG is personal protective equipment
designed for heat and moisture resistance in order to protect
firefighters in hazardous situations. Most turnout gear is made up
of a thermal liner, moisture barrier, and an outer layer. The inner
layers contain PFAS, and the outer layer is often treated with
additional PFAS.
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
the Decedent in their intended manner, without significant change
in the products' condition. Decedent was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
the Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the
products. Decedent's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal
absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF or TOG products caused
Decedent to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF or TOG products at various locations during the course of
Decedent's training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further
seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from
the same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF and TOG in training and to extinguish fires during his working
career as a military and/or civilian firefighter who resided on or
near military bases that regularly used AFFF and was thereby
exposed to contaminated groundwater and drinking water and was
diagnosed with Prostate Cancer as a result of exposure to
Defendants' AFFF or TOG products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Stephen "Buck" Daniel, Esq.
RUEB STOLLER DANIEL, LLP
225 Ottley Drive NE, Suite 110
Atlanta, GA 30624
Phone: 404-381-2888
Email: buck@lawrsd.com
3M COMPANY: Koerner Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric J. Koerner and Martha K. Koerner, and other similarly situated
v. 3M COMPANY, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company;
ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS, INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA US,
INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT
COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHE-MDESIGN PRODUCTS INC.;
CHE-MGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA,
INC.; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE
NEMOURS, INC., f/k/a DowDuPont, Inc.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DV
PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE P.L.C.,
INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC., a/Wa Chubb
National Foam; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; UNITED CORPORATION; UTC FIRE AMERICAS
CORPORATION, Interlogix, Inc., TECHNOLOGIES & SECURITIES INC.,
f/n/a GE Interlogix, Inc., Case No. 2:23-cv-05795-RMG (D.S.C., Nov.
10, 2023), is brought for personal injury damages resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires.
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce, AFFF with knowledge that it contained
highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose end users
of the product to the risks associated with PFAS. Further,
defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF which contained
PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff Vernon Burks in their intended manner, without
significant change in the products' condition. Plaintiff Vernon
Burks was unaware of the dangerous properties of the Defendants'
AFFF products and relied on the Defendants' instructions as to the
proper handling of the products. Plaintiff Vernon Burks'
consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of PFAS from
Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the serious
medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiffs seek to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff
Vernon Burks' training and firefighting activities. Plaintiffs
further seek injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising
from the same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff Eric Koerner regularly used, and was thereby directly
exposed to, AFFF in training and to extinguish active fires during
his working career as a military and/or civilian firefighter and
was diagnosed with prostate cancer as a result of exposure to
Defendants' AFFF products. The Plaintiff Martha Koerner is married
to Eric Koerner,
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and/or sellers of
PFAS-containing AFFF or underlying PFAS containing PFOA or PFOS
chemicals used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Charles R. Houssiere, III, Esq.
Michael R. Null, Esq.
HOUSSIERE, DURANT & HOUSSIERE, LLP
1990 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 800
Houston, TX 77056-3812
Phone: 713-626-3700
Facsimile: 713-626-3709
Email: choussiere@hdhtex.com
mnull@hdhtex.com
3M COMPANY: Kritner Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals
---------------------------------------------------------
Tina Kritner, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company), Case No.
2:23-cv-05695-RMG (D.S.C. Nov. 7, 2023), is brought for damages for
personal injury resulting from exposure to the toxic chemicals
collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS").
PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid
("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related
chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
The Defendant collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise inappropriately disposed of PFAS chemicals with knowledge
that it was highly toxic and bio persistent, which would expose
plaintiff to the risks associated with PFAS.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendant knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous PFAS in his drinking
water and unaware of the toxic nature of the Defendant's PFAS in
general. Plaintiff's consumption of PFAS from Defendant's
contamination and inappropriate disposal caused Plaintiff to
develop the serious medical conditions and complications alleged
herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendant's
PFAS at various locations. Plaintiff further seeks injunctive,
equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the same, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff was exposed to PFAS chemicals through drinking water
both at home and at his place of work, due to contamination on
behalf of the 3M plant in Decatur, Alabama and potential AFFF
sources, and was diagnosed with testicular cancer as a result of
exposure to Defendant's PFAS contamination.
The Defendant is a designer, marketer, developer, manufacturer,
distributor, releaser, promotors and seller of PFAS chemicals.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
- and -
Hunter Garnett, Esq.
GARNETT PATTERSON INJURY LAWYERS
100 Jefferson St S #300
Huntsville, AL 35801
Phone: 256-539-8686
600 NORTH AKARD: Collective Action Certification Sought
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Cesar Sanchez,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. 600
North Akard LLC d/b/a Dakota's Steakhouse; Lincoln Restaurant Group
Inc.; and Timothy McEneny, Case No. 3:23-cv-00540-L-BN (N.D. Tex.),
the Parties file a joint motion for certification of a collective
action and the issuance of court-authorized notice.
On November 28, 2023, the parties filed a Supplemental Joint Status
Report, where parties advised the Court of their agreement and
stipulation to certify a collective of employees consisting of
servers and bartenders under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
Specifically, the parties agree and stipulate to certify a
collective pursuant to 29 U.S.C. section 216(b), of two groups of
employees defined as:
-- Server Collective Members
"All current and former employees who worked at least one
shift
as a server (i.e. waiter or waitress) at Dakota's Steakhouse
since September 1, 2021, through the present and were paid a
direct cash wage of less than minimum wage."
-- Bartender Collective Members
"All current and former employees who worked at least one
shift
as a bartender at Dakota’s Steakhouse since September 1,
2021,
through the present and were paid a direct cash wage of less
than minimum wage."
The parties further stipulate to a sixty (60) day opt-in period,
and respectfully request the Court enter the following deadlines to
facilitate the dissemination of notice:
On or before Defendants shall provide to Plaintiffs'
counsel
Jan. 12, 2024 in Excel (.xlsx) format the following
information
regarding all Collective Members: full name;
last
known mailing address(es) with city, state,
and
Zip Code; all known telephone number(s), email
address(es); job title(s), and beginning date
of
employment and ending date of employment (if
applicable).
On or before Plaintiffs' Counsel shall send the
Court-approved
Feb. 2, 2024 Notice and Consent Form (Exhibit 1) to the
Collective Members by First Class U.S. Mail;
Plaintiffs' Counsel shall also send the
Court-
approved Notice (Exhibit 2) via text message
No later than Plaintiffs' Counsel shall file with the Court
15 days after all signed Consents to Join the close of
the Notice Period.
600 North is a subterranean seafood & steakhouse.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Dec. 19, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41HU2ID at no extra charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Drew N. Herrmann, Esq.
Pamela G. Herrmann, Esq.
HERRMANN LAW, PLLC
801 Cherry St., Suite 2365
Fort Worth, TX 76102
Telephone: (817) 479-9229
Facsimile: (817) 840-5102
E-mail: drew@herrmannlaw.com
pamela@herrmannlaw.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Rogge Dunn, Esq.
Bryan C. Collins, Esq.
Greg McAllister, Esq.
ROGGE DUNN GROUP, PC
500 N. Akard Street, Suite 1900
Dallas, TX 75201
Telephone: (214) 888-5000
Facsimile: (214) 220-3833
E-mail: Dunn@Restaurantlaw.com
Collins@roggedunngroup.com
McAllister@roggedunngroup.com
AETNA LIFE: Bid for Leave to File Class Cert Opposition OK'd
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Andrew Howard, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated, v. AETNA LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. 2:22-cv-01505-CJC-MRW (C.D. Cal.), the
Hon. Judge Cormac J. Carney entered an order granting Aetna's
unopposed application for leave to file portions of opposition to
the Plaintiff's motion to certify class actions and supporting
exhibits under seal.
Aetna offers a broad range of traditional and consumer-directed
health insurance products and related services.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 19, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3TJmXKd at no extra charge.[CC]
AGEX THERAPEUTICS: Buttner Balks at Merger Deal With Serina
-----------------------------------------------------------
EDWARD BRADFORD BUTTNER, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. AGEX THERAPEUTICS, INC., JUVENESCENCE
LIMITED, JUVENESCENCE US CORP., JOANNE M. HACKETT, GREGORY BAILEY,
MICHAEL H. MAY, JEAN-CHRISTOPHE RENONDIN, and ANDREA E. PARK, Case
No. 23CV057083(Cal. Super., Dec. 11, 2023) is a stockholder class
action on behalf of the Plaintiff and similarly situated minority
shareholders of AgeX Therapeutics, Inc. against the Defendants in
connection with the financially unfair and conflicted proposed
merger of AgeX with Serina Therapeutics, Inc., which the Defendants
designed to promote the interests of Juvenescence at the expense of
ordinary unaffiliated AgeX stockholders.
On August 29, 2023, AgeX and Serina entered into an agreement and
plan of merger. At the completion of the Merger, the pro forma
company will be 75% owned by current Serina shareholders and 25%
owned by current AgeX shareholders. Serina is the functional
acquiror in the Merger.
The Individual Defendants have breached their fiduciary duty of
good faith, loyalty, and/or candor to the Plaintiff and the Class
by disseminating materially incomplete and omissive information
concerning the Merger to the Company's public stockholders; and by
pursuing and authorizing an unfair Merger with Serina that serves
the interests of Juvenescence, to the detriment of minority
stockholder, the lawsuit asserts.
As a result of the Individual Defendants' breaches, the Plaintiff
and other public shareholders will suffer harm and damages by being
prevented from casting an informed vote on the Merger. Because
Juvenescence and Bailey have interests that are inconsistent with
the interests of the Company's non-controlling, common
stockholders, and because Juvenescence and Bailey acted to unfairly
favor their own interests at the expense of minority stockholders,
Juvenescence and Bailey breached their fiduciary duties to minority
stockholders, including the duty to ensure that the Merger was
entirely fair to those minority stockholders, the lawsuit claims.
As a result of Juvenescence's and Bailey's breaches, the Plaintiff
and other public shareholders have allegedly suffered and will
suffer harm and damages, in an amount to be determined at trial.
The Plaintiff is a stockholder of AgeX.
AgeX is a biotechnology company focused on the development and
commercialization of novel therapeutics targeting human aging and
degenerative diseases.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David E. Bower, Esq.
Juan E. Monteverde, Esq.
Jonathan T. Lerner, Esq.
MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC
600 Corporate Pointe, Suite 1170
Culver City, CA 90230
Telephone: (213) 446-6652
Facsimile: (212) 202-7880
E-mail: dbower@monteverdelaw.com
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com
APPLE INC: Starts Paying Suit Settlement Over Defective Batteries
-----------------------------------------------------------------
David Nield of TechRadar reports that you may remember that back in
2020, Apple settled a class action lawsuit in the US by agreeing to
compensate iPhone users for deliberately slowing down (or
throttling) performance on older iPhones. Now those payments are
being sent out.
As reported by MacRumors and others, people who filed a claim for
compensation from Apple are now getting their payments of $92.17.
The official website for the litigation confirms that the last
appeal was dismissed in December 2023, and that therefore payments
can be issued from January 2024.
The payments can total up to $500 million (about £393 million or
AU$746 million), depending on the number of claimants. Don't expect
any money if you haven't already registered a claim though - the
deadline for applying for compensation from Apple was back on
October 6, 2020.
To be eligible, you had to have been a US-based owner of an iPhone
6, 6 Plus, 6s, 6s Plus, and/or SE device running iOS 10.2.1 or
later before December 21, 2017, and/or a US-based owner of an
iPhone 7 or 7 Plus device running iOS 11.2 or later before December
21, 2017.
As you may remember, the lawsuit was originally filed all the way
back in December 2017, after Apple admitted that iOS slows down
iPhone performance as batteries get older, in order to ensure
device stability - a practice it didn't tell users about.
Apple's reasoning was that it kept older iPhones running for
longer, but users weren't happy about the lack of transparency: a
sizable number of people felt they were being pushed into upgrading
their iPhones, or having to order an expensive battery replacement
for them, sooner than they otherwise would.
This kind of performance management is still in place on January 8,
2024 on iOS 17 - only now it's fully detailed and explained, and
users have the option of turning it off. Apple has always insisted
it was in the right, and says that it only agreed to settle the
lawsuit in order to avoid a lengthy and expensive court case.
If you did get your compensation claim in before the deadline in
2020, check your bank account - you may well now have a 2024 bonus
payment from Apple, almost four years after the settlement
agreement was reached. [GN]
ARIZONA BEVERAGES: Class Cert Bid Filing Modified to April 1, 2024
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jamison v. Arizona
Beverages USA, et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-00920 (N.D. Cal., Filed
March 1, 2023), the Hon. Judge Rita F. Lin entered an order
modifying case schedule as follows:
-- Class Certification Motion and April 1, 2024
Plaintiff's Class Certification
Expert Disclosures due on:
-- Opposition to Class Certification May 31, 2024
and Expert Disclosures Opposing
Class Certification due on:
-- Reply in Support of Class June 28, 2024
Certification Motion due on:
-- Hearing on Class Certification July 9, 2024
Motion set for:
The nature of suit states Torst -- Personal Property -- Other
Fraud.
Arizona Beverages is a producer of many flavors of iced tea, juice
cocktails, and energy drinks.[CC]
AT & T: Blum Lawsuit Removed from State Court to W.D. Louisiana
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against AT & T Corp et al.
The class action lawsuit captioned as Blum et al., v. AT & T Corp
et al., Case No. 137935, was removed from 16th JDC Parish of St.
Mary to the United States District Court Western District of
Louisiana on Dec. 12, 2023.
The Western Louisiana District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
6:23-cv-01748-RRS-CBW to the proceeding.
The nature of suit states Torts to Land.
The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Robert R. Summerhays.
AT&T is the subsidiary of AT&T Inc. that provides voice, video,
data, and Internet telecommunications and professional
service.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Elizabeth Blair Schilling, Esq.
Harvey Sylvanous Bartlett, III, Esq.
James R Swanson, Esq.
Kerry J Miller, Esq.
Lance C McCardle, Esq.
Paul Charest Thibodeaux, Esq.
FISHMAN HAYGOOD
201 St Charles Ave 46th Fl
New Orleans, LA 70170
Telephone: (504) 556-5252
Facsimile: (504) 586-5250
E-mail: bschilling@fishmanhaygood.com
tbartlett@fishmanhaygood.com
jswanson@fishmanhaygood.com
kmiller@fishmanhaygood.com
lmccardle@fishmanhaygood.com
pthibodeaux@fishmanhaygood.com
- and -
Bernard E Boudreaux, Jr., Esq.
Gladstone Nathaniel Jones, III, Esq.
John Thomas Arnold, Esq.
Kevin Earl Huddell, Esq.
Michael P Arata, Esq.
JONES SWANSON ET AL
301 N Main St Ste 1920
Baton Rouge, LA 70825
Telephone: (225) 810-3165
Facsimile: (225) 810-3169
E-mail: bboudreaux@jonesswanson.com
gjones@jonesswanson.com
jarnold@jonesswanson.com
khuddell@jonesswanson.com
marata@jonesswanson.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Adam Bennett Zuckerman, Esq.
Lauren Brink Adams, Esq.
William E Wildman, III, Esq.
BAKER DONELSON ET AL
201 St Charles Ave Ste 3600
New Orleans, LA 70170
Telephone: (504) 566-5200
Facsimile: (504) 636-4000
E-mail: azuckerman@bakerdonelson.com
lbrink@bakerdonelson.com
wwildman@bakerdonelson.com
- and -
Mark J Nomellini, Esq.
Robert B Ellis, Esq.
KIRKLAND & ELLIS
300 N LaSalle St
Chicago, IL 60654
Telephone: (312) 862-2000
E-mail: mnomellini@kirland.com
robert.ellis@kirkland.com
- and -
Francis X Neuner, Jr., Esq.
Ben L Mayeaux, Esq.
Jed Michel Mestayer, Esq.
NEUNER PATE
1001 W Pinhook Rd Ste 200
Lafayette, LA 70503
Telephone: (337) 237-7000
Facsimile: (337) 233-9450
E-mail: fneuner@neunerpate.com
bmayeaux@neunerpate.com
jmestayer@neunerpate.com
- and -
Loulan Joseph Pitre, Jr., Esq.
Jane Allison Jackson, Esq.
KELLY HART PITRE
400 Poydras St Ste 1812
New Orleans, LA 70130
Telephone: (504) 522-1812
Facsimile: (504) 522-1813
E-mail: loulan.pitre@kellyhart.com
jane.jackson@kellyhart.com
- and -
Anderson T Bailey, Esq.
Bridget K O'Connor, Esq.
Leon F DeJulius, Jr., Esq.
Sharyl A Reisman, Esq.
JONES DAY
500 Grant St Ste 4500
Pittsburg, PA 15219
Telephone: (412) 391-3939
Facsimile: (412) 394-7959
E-mail: atbailey@jonesday.com
boconnor@jonesday.com
lfdejulius@jonesday.com
sareisman@jonesday.com
- and -
Megan R Nishikawa, Esq.
HOGAN LOVELLS US
4 Embarcadero Ctr Ste 3500
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 374-2300
Facsimile: (415) 374-2499
E-mail: megan.nishikawa@hoganlovells.com
ATHENA COSMETICS: Markoff Sues Over Unfair and Deceptive Sale
-------------------------------------------------------------
Corrine Markoff, individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. ATHENA COSMETICS, INC., Case No.
1:23-cv-16401 (N.D. Ill., Nov. 30, 2023), is brought arising from
the false, misleading, unfair, and deceptive sale of beauty
products without disclosing dangerous risks and side effects of the
products' key ingredient in violation of the Florida Deceptive and
Unfair Trade Practices Act ("FDUTPA").
Among its products are RevitaLash Advanced Eye Serum, RevitaBrow
Advanced Serum, RevitaLash Advanced Pro, and RevitaLash Advanced
Sensitive (hereafter, the "Enhancement Serums" or the "Products").
Athena deceptively marketed and sold the Enhancement Serums,
without a prescription, as cosmetics or so-called "serums" (not as
drugs), with no warning of serious side effects or risks. Instead,
Athena touted the safety of the Enhancement Serums.
The Enhancement Serums, however, contain dechloro dihdroxy difluoro
ethylcloprostenolamide ("DDDE"). DDDE is a prostaglandin analog
(PGA), which is in the same class of compounds as the active
ingredient found in prescription drugs that grows eyelashes, like
Latisse--which the FDA has approved for use only under the
supervision of a physician due to the possible adverse effects
associated with its active ingredient.
PGAs such as DDDE improve hair growth, causing eye lashes and
eyebrows to grow longer, darker, and thicker. However, they are
also known to cause serious adverse effects to the eye and the
structure around the eye, including but not limited to blepharitis,
Meibomian Gland Dysfunction, chronic dry eye, redness,
discoloration, pain or irritation, and other serious side effects.
The United States Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") has warned
manufacturers that a similar over-the-counter products containing
PGAs are considered "drugs" and are associated with potential
serious side effects. The FDA has further warned that lash and brow
products containing PGAs are not safe for use except under
supervision of a licensed physician.
Athena did not disclose the risk of any side effects associated
with its Enhancement Serums and has even affirmatively denied, in
its marketing and labeling materials, that its products contain any
active ingredient or "drug." To the contrary, Athena falsely
implied the Enhancement Serums are effective at improving the
appearance of eyelashes and eyebrows because of the natural
ingredients and "vitamins" contained therein. To the contrary, the
longer hair effect is the result of the active ingredient, DDDE a
"drug" associated with many undisclosed side effects, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff purchased RevitaLash Advanced in August 2023 for
personal use, and in fact she so used the product.
Athena manufactures and sells beauty products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Paul T. Geske, Esq.
MCGUIRE LAW, P.C.
55 W. Wacker Dr., 9th Floor
Chicago, IL 60601
Phone: 312-893-7002 ext. 4
Email: pgeske@mcgpc.com
- and -
Ruben Honik, Esq.
David J. Stanoch, Esq.
HONIK LLC
1515 Market Street, Suite 1100
Philadelphia, PA 19102
Phone: 267-435-1300
Email: ruben@honiklaw.com
david@honiklaw.com
- and -
Louiza Tarassova, Esq.
LOU LAW
2180 N Park Ave., Suite 208
Winter Park, FL 32789
Phone: 407-622-1885
Email: louiza@mylawadvocate.com
ATHENA COSMETICS: Slattery Sues Over False and Misleading Sale
--------------------------------------------------------------
Doriann Slattery, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. ATHENA COSMETICS, INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-10078-HDV-AJR
(C.D. Cal., Nov. 30, 2023), is brought arising from the false,
misleading, unfair, and deceptive sale of beauty products without
disclosing dangerous risks and side effects of the products' key
ingredient in violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade
Practices Act ("FDUTPA").
Among its products are RevitaLash Advanced Eye Serum, RevitaBrow
Advanced Serum, RevitaLash Advanced Pro, and RevitaLash Advanced
Sensitive (hereafter, the "Enhancement Serums" or the "Products").
Athena deceptively marketed and sold the Enhancement Serums,
without a prescription, as cosmetics or so-called "serums" (not as
drugs), with no warning of serious side effects or risks. Instead,
Athena touted the safety of the Enhancement Serums.
The Enhancement Serums, however, contain dechloro dihdroxy difluoro
ethylcloprostenolamide ("DDDE"). DDDE is a prostaglandin analog
(PGA), which is in the same class of compounds as the active
ingredient found in prescription drugs that grows eyelashes, like
Latisse--which the FDA has approved for use only under the
supervision of a physician due to the possible adverse effects
associated with its active ingredient.
PGAs such as DDDE improve hair growth, causing eye lashes and
eyebrows to grow longer, darker, and thicker. However, they are
also known to cause serious adverse effects to the eye and the
structure around the eye, including but not limited to blepharitis,
Meibomian Gland Dysfunction, chronic dry eye, redness,
discoloration, pain or irritation, and other serious side effects.
The United States Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") has warned
manufacturers that a similar over-the-counter products containing
PGAs are considered "drugs" and are associated with potential
serious side effects. The FDA has further warned that lash and brow
products containing PGAs are not safe for use except under
supervision of a licensed physician.
Athena did not disclose the risk of any side effects associated
with its Enhancement Serums and has even affirmatively denied, in
its marketing and labeling materials, that its products contain any
active ingredient or "drug." To the contrary, Athena falsely
implied the Enhancement Serums are effective at improving the
appearance of eyelashes and eyebrows because of the natural
ingredients and "vitamins" contained therein. To the contrary, the
longer hair effect is the result of the active ingredient, DDDE a
"drug" associated with many undisclosed side effects, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff purchased RevitaLash Advanced in July and November
2022 for personal use, and in fact she so used the product.
Athena manufactures and sells beauty products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Peter J. Farnese, Esq.
FARNESE P.C.
700 Flower St., Suite 1000
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Phone: (310) 356-4668
Email: pjf@farneselaw.com
- and -
Ruben Honik, Esq.
David J. Stanoch, Esq.
HONIK LLC
1515 Market St., Suite 1100
Philadelphia, PA 19102
Phone: (267) 435-1300
Email: ruben@honiklaw.com
david@honiklaw.com
- and -
Louiza Tarassova, Esq.
LOU LAW
2180 N Park Ave., Suite 208
Winter Park, FL 32789
Phone: (407) 622-1885
Email: louiza@mylawadvocate.com
BANK OF AMERICA: Agrees to Settle Transfer Fees' Class Suit for $8M
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Top Class Actions reports that Bank of America agreed to an $8
million settlement to resolve claims that it charged unfair ACH
transfer fees for push transfers to customer accounts.
The settlement benefits individuals who had a consumer checking
and/or savings account with Bank of America and paid certain ACH
transfer fees for push transfers to their own external account
between April 4, 2018, and Nov. 17, 2023.
Plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit claim Bank of America
charged deceptive ACH transfer fees despite the fact that any
transfer over the National Automated Clearinghouse "can always be
made for free." These $3 to $10 fees allegedly added up to
significant profits for Bank of America at the expense of
consumers.
Bank of America is a national financial institution that offers
banking and lending services to consumers and businesses.
The bank hasn’t admitted any wrongdoing but agreed to a $8
million settlement to resolve the bank fees class action lawsuit.
Under the settlement terms, class members can receive a
proportional share of the net settlement fund based on the number
of eligible ACH fees they paid. Payments will vary depending on the
number of participating class members, but each class member is
guaranteed to receive at least $2.
Current Bank of America customers will receive their settlement
payment as an account credit, while class members without a Bank of
America account will receive a check.
The deadline for exclusion and objection is March 18, 2024.
The final approval hearing for the settlement is scheduled for
April 30, 2024.
No claim form is required to benefit from the settlement. Class
members who do not exclude themselves will automatically receive a
settlement payment.
Who’s Eligible
Individuals who had a consumer checking and/or savings account with
Bank of America and paid certain ACH transfer fees for push
transfers to their own external account between April 4, 2018, and
Nov. 17, 2023
Potential Award
Varies
Proof of Purchase
N/A
Exclusion Deadline
03/18/2024
Case Name
Bruin, et al. v. Bank of America NA, Case No. 3:22-cv-140-MOC-WCM,
in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North
Carolina
Final Hearing
04/30/2024
Settlement Website
ACHFirstPartyFeeSettlement.com
Claims Administrator
Bruin, et al. v. Bank of America, N.A.
Kroll Settlement Administration LLC
PO Box 5324
New York, NY 10150-5324
833-933-5580
Class Counsel
Andrew Shamis
Shamis & Gentile PA
Scott Edelsberg
Christopher Gold
EDELSBERG LAW PA
David M Wilkerson
Larry McDevitt
THE VAN WINKLE LAW FIRM
Jeffrey D Kaliel
Sophia Gold
KALIEL GOLD PLLC
Defense Counsel
Allison J Schoenthal
Laura G Brys
GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
Bradley Kutrow
MCGUIREWOODS LLP [GN]
CAMERON MEMORIAL: Doe Lawsuit Removed from Super. Ct. to N.D. Ind.
------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Cameron Memorial
Community Hospital. The case captioned as Doe v. Cameron Memorial
Community Hospital, Case No. 76C01-2311-PL-000495 (Filed Nov. 8,
2023), was removed from the Steuben County Superior Court to the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana
on Dec. 8, 2023.
The Northern Indiana District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
1:23-cv-00510-DRL-SLC to the proceedings.
The suit alleges violation Contract related laws.
The case is assigned to the Hon. Damon R Leichty.
Cameron is an independent, not-for-profit facility that serves
Angola and Steuben County.[BN]
Plaintiff Jane Doe individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, is represented by:
Lynn A Toops, Esq.
COHEN & MALAD LLP
One Indiana Sq Ste 1400
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Telephone: (317) 636-6481
Facsimile: (317) 636-2593
E-mail: ltoops@cohenandmalad.com
Defendant Cameron Memorial Community Hospital is represented by:
Kimberly C Metzger, Esq.
MCCARTER & ENGLISH LLP
880 W Monon Green Blvd Ste 101
Carmel, IN 46032
Telephone: (317) 363-3232
E-mail: kmetzger@mccarter.com
CELLCO PARTNERSHIP: Settles Administrative Charges Suit for $100M
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Clifford Colby of CNET reports that you may be owed money as part
of a $100 million class action lawsuit settlement, if you're a
current or former Verizon customer who purchased a traditional,
postpaid wireless plan in the past seven years. Verizon is making
the payments to address claims that its service plans were
misleading because the advertised prices did not include an
administrative charge.
In a class-action lawsuit, the plaintiffs allege that Verizon
implemented, charged and increased an administrative fee for
postpaid wireless or data services in a deceptive and unfair
manner.
In a statement to CNET, a Verizon spokesperson said the company
"clearly identifies and describes its wireless consumer Admin
Charge multiple times during the sales transaction, as well as in
its marketing, contracts and billing. This charge helps our company
recover certain regulatory compliance and network-related costs."
[GN]
CENTRAL GARDEN: Graham Has Until May 15 to File Class Cert Bid
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as HILLORI GRAHAM,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
CENTRAL GARDEN & PET COMPANY, Case No. 3:22-cv-06507-JSC (N.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley entered an order
extending class Certification briefing schedule and hearing date:
-- The Plaintiff Graham has until May 15, 2024 to move for class
certification and disclose experts in support of class
certification.
-- The Defendant shall file its opposition to Plaintiff’s motion
for
class certification and disclose experts in opposition to class
certification on July 24, 2024.
-- The Plaintiff shall file her reply in support of class
certification by August 14, 2024.
-- The Plaintiff's motion for class certification shall be heard
on
August 29, 2024.
Central Garden is an innovator, marketer and producer of quality
branded products for the lawn & garden and pet supplies markets.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 18, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3S1WTsM at no extra charge.[CC]
CHARLOTTE, NC: Durham Seeks More Time to File Opposition Response
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as HEATHER NICOLE DURHAM, on
behalf of himself and others similarly situated, v. CITY OF
CHARLOTTE, a North Carolina municipal corporation, Case No.
3:21-cv-00638-RJC-SCR (W.D.N.C.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to
enter an order granting extension of time to respond to the
Defendant's Response in Opposition to Motion for Class
Certification.
1. The Defendant’s Response was filed on December 15, 2023.
The
Plaintiff's Reply is currently due on December 22, 2023.
2. Undersigned counsel currently have additional filing
deadlines
before the end of the year and it is the holidays making
feedback from all co-counsel difficult.
3. The Plaintiff seeks a twenty-one (21) day extension through
Friday, January 12, 2024
Charlotte is a major city and commercial hub in North Carolina.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 19, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3H3uNH4 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. David Stradley, Esq.
Robert P. Holmes, IV, Esq.
WHITE & STRADLEY, PLLC
Charles B. Root Wynd
Raleigh, NC 27612
Telephone: (919) 844-0400
E-mail: stradley@whiteandstradley.com
rob@whiteandstradley.com
- and -
John F. Bloss, Esq.
Frederick L. Berry, Esq.
HIGGINS BENJAMIN, PLLC 3105
301 North Elm Street, Suite 800
Greensboro, NC 27401
Telephone:(336) 273-1600
E-mail: jbloss@greensborolaw.com
fberry@greensborolaw.com
- and -
Andrew H. Brown, Esq.
James R. Faucher, Esq.
BROWN, FAUCHER, PERALDO & BENSON, PLLC
822 N. Elm Street, Suite 200
Greensboro, NC 27401
Telephone:(336) 478-6000
E-mail: drew@greensborolawcenter.com
james@greensborolawcenter.com
CIRCULAR BOARD: Bids to Dismiss Racial Discrimination Class Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Megan Sayles of AFRO News reports that Progressive Insurance and
Hello Alice, a small business resource platform based in Houston,
are in the midst of a legal battle with America First Legal (AFL)
over a grant program that targeted Black businesses. The
conservative nonprofit law organization filed a class-action
lawsuit against the pair regarding the Driving Small Business
Forward grant, which awarded $25,000 to 10 Black entrepreneurs in
August, alleging that the program was racially discriminatory.
On Dec. 13, Hello Alice filed a motion to dismiss the case. In it,
Hello Alice contended that the lawsuit is "wrong in every relevant
respect."
"Hello Alice's mission is to help small businesses throughout this
country, and Hello Alice vehemently opposes racial discrimination.
Indeed, Hello Alice's core mission is to combat the effects that
generations of pernicious racism have had on America's capital
infrastructure. Federal law does not compel purely private actors
like Hello Alice, when choosing how and to whom they will donate
money, to blind themselves to the centuries of invidious racism
that have produced substantial existing racial inequities in access
to capital."
On Dec. 20, the Southern Poverty Law Center, Lawyers' Committee for
Civil Rights Under Law, Hispanic National Bar Association and Asian
Americans Advancing Justice filed an amicus brief supporting the
dismissal of the case.
This is not the first time AFL has lodged a class-action lawsuit
against a company earmarking grants for underrepresented
entrepreneurs. In July 2022, it sued Amazon for a diversity grant
that deployed $10,000 to Black, LatinX and Native American business
owners to cover startup costs.
Nathan Roberts, owner of an Ohio trucking company, is at the center
of AFL's suit against Hello Alice and Progressive. Roberts, who's
White, allegedly received an email about the Driving Small Business
Forward grant program and began filling out an application before
realizing it was exclusive to Black entrepreneurs, according to the
complaint. Once he did, he closed the application.
"All Americans deserve to be free from racial discrimination, yet
major corporations across the United States inject racial
considerations into every aspect of their business operations,
employment practices and so much more. As alleged in our complaint,
our client—who is a small business owner fighting to create a
better life for himself and his family—was denied a contract with
Progressive that would have provided him with $25,000 toward the
purchase of a new truck solely because of the amount of pigment in
his skin," said Gene Hamilton, vice president and general counsel
for AFL, in a statement.
"Progressive's racially discriminatory arrangement is offensive to
the American ideal, and we will fight to vindicate his rights and
the rights of all similarly situated Americans."
In a statement on X, Hello Alice executives, Elizabeth Gore,
Carolyn Rodz and Kelsey Rudger, called the case baseless, saying it
sets the nation and small businesses back.
"Hello Alice strongly disagrees with the legal theory of this
lawsuit, which is part of a larger strategy to attack voluntary,
private-sector efforts to combat the lingering effects of racism on
the American economy."
"This lawsuit alleges that Hello Alice engaged in unlawful racial
discrimination by helping Progressive Insurance award grants to 10
Black-owned small businesses," wrote the Hello Alice executives in
the post. "Hello Alice strongly disagrees with the legal theory of
this lawsuit, which is part of a larger strategy to attack
voluntary, private-sector efforts to combat the lingering effects
of racism on the American economy."
In response to the suit, Hello Alice has initiated a new grant
program enabling individuals to nominate small businesses they
believe to be "American Dream" visionaries. The winners will
receive $1,000 in funding, access to a small business accelerator
and media coverage.
"Hello Alice has administered over $40 million in grants to
entrepreneurs who are job creators of all races, industries,
genders and geographies. Our technology has connected 1.4 million
of you with loans, credit, grants or resources to grow your
business," wrote the Hello Alice executives in the statement. "Now
that AFL has poked the small business bear, we are doubling down,
and doing so, as always, in a lawful way that holds true to
America's core values." [GN]
COLUMBIA RECYCLING: Plaintiffs Seeks to Distribute Notice
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Osvaldo de la Fuente and
Victor Hugo Tapia Romero, v. Columbia Recycling Corp. and Gold Pond
Corp., Case No. 4:22-cv-00256-WMR (N.D. Ga.), the Plaintiffs move
the Court to enter an order permitting them to distribute to
collective members the modified Notice of Collective Action Lawsuit
attached as Exhibit B, with the bracketed text in Section 12 to be
replaced with the date that is ninety days from when Defendants
provide Plaintiffs with the putative collective members' contact
information.
-- On April 14, 2023, the Plaintiffs filed their motion for
conditional certification and Court-Facilitated Notice,
seeking
conditional certification of three subclasses (Subclasses I,
II,
and III), with a limitations period of three years from the
date
Plaintiffs filed the lawsuit.
The Plaintiffs included a proposed Notice of Collective Action
Lawsuit with their Conditional Certification Motion.
Columbia Recycling specializes in synthetic fiber extrusion and
pelletization.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 19, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3RFAY9k at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Daniel Werner, Esq.
James Radford, Esq.
RADFORD SCOTT, LLP
315 W. Ponce de Leon Ave., Suite 1080
Decatur, GA 30030
Telephone: (678) 271-0300
E-mail: dwerner@radfordscott.com
jradford@radfordscott.com
- and -
Chris B. Hall, Esq.
HALL & LAMPROS, LLP
300 Galleria Parkway, Suite 300
Atlanta, GA 30339
Telephone: (404) 876-8100
E-mail: chall@hallandlampros.com
- and -
Brian J. Sutherland, Esq.
Rachel Berlin Benjamin, Esq.
BEAL, SUTHERLAND, BERLIN &
BROWN, LLC
945 East Paces Ferry Road, NE, Suite 2000
Atlanta, GA 30326
E-mail: brian@beal.law
rachel@beal.law
CONSUMER SAFETY: Faces Mallory Class Suit Over Breach of Contract
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Consumer Safety
Technology, LLC (JRG1). The case is captioned as Mallory v.
Consumer Safety Technology, LLC (JRG1), Case No.
3:23-cv-00436-JRG-DCP (E.D. Tenn., Dec. 8, 2023).
The nature of suit states Breach of Contract.
The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge J Ronnie Greer.
Consumer Safety manufactures interlock devices.[BN]
Plaintiff Max Mallory Individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, is represented by:
Chris T Cain, Esq.
W. Allen McDonald, Esq.
LACY, PRICE & WAGNER, PC
249 North Peters Road, Suite 101
Knoxville, TN 37923
Telephone: (865) 246-0800
Facsimile: (865) 690-8199
E-mail: Chris@lpwpc.com
amcdonald@lpwpc.com
DETROIT, MI: Faces High-Volume Customers' Water Rates Class Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sarah Rahal of The Detroit News reports that an industrial water
customer in Detroit has filed a class-action lawsuit in Wayne
County Circuit Court challenging Detroit's water-rate charges for
those that use it in mass quantities.
The lawsuit filed by Ajax Metal Processing Inc. on Nov. 27 alleges
the city's water rates for commercial users are resulting in
overcharges that are "arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable and
therefore are unlawful under Michigan common-law."
In August 2022, Detroit's Water and Sewerage Department changed the
structure of water rates where users pay different amounts for
different consumption levels, referred to as a block rate. Meters
measure the volume of water used in hundreds of centum cubic feet
(CCF). One CCF of water equals 748 gallons.
Rates are charged for water being consumed and disposed of through
separate rates.
For those using less than 4,500 gallons (six CCFs) per month, the
Board of Water Commissioners approved a rate of $2.50 per CCF per
month in 2022. In July 2023, the commission increased that rate by
8 cents to $2.58.
For high-volume customers, they charged an increase of 14 cents per
CCF from $4.49 to $4.63 in July. The more water used, the higher
the rate increases.
Sewerage rates have also increased per CCF from $5.40 in 2021, to
$5.54 in 2022, and to $5.71 in 2023.
The drainage monthly rate has increased slightly depending on how
much acreage the land is -- from $677 in 2021, to $678.28 in 2022,
and $695.23 in 2023.
"The city's use of the block rates results in high-volume water
users, almost all of which are commercial and industrial users,
being charged amounts far in excess of the amount the city actually
incurs to service those users," according to the lawsuit. "The
block rate overcharges allow the city to charge residential water
customers much less than the amount the city actually incurs to
service those users, even though there is no meaningful per-gallon
difference in the cost of servicing each class of users."
The change in water rates started in August 2022 after the city
announced its first income-based water affordability program called
the Lifeline Plan last summer. The Detroit Water and Sewerage
Department announced new standards to charge low-income residents
1.8% of their average monthly household income -- about $18 a month
for low-income residents, and up to $56 a month for residents that
have moderate income.
“We have received the Ajax complaint and we are reviewing it with
outside counsel," said Bryan Peckinpaugh, spokesman for DWSD. "The
inclining block rate for water usage was created by the Detroit
Water and Sewerage Department effective August 2022, as approved by
the Board of Water Commissioners, based on a Detroit water,
sewerage and drainage rate study performed by a nationally
recognized ratemaking firm. The inclining block rate was not
developed for the DWSD Lifeline Plan. Other than this statement,
the department does not comment on pending litigation.”
The lawsuit claims the block rates violate the Detroit City
Charter, which requires all water rates to be "equitable."
"The two 'tiers' adopted by the City bear no reasonable
relationship to a difference in costs associated with servicing the
two 'tiers' but instead have been carefully crafted to move the
financial burden of paying the City's costs of providing water
service off of residential customers and on to commercial and
industrial users," the lawsuit alleges. "In essence, the City's use
of the Block Rates discriminates against the disfavored significant
users by forcing them to subsidize the City's cost of servicing the
favored residential users."
The lawsuit seeks overcharges to be refunded and is requesting an
injunction prohibiting the city from utilizing block rates in the
future.
Ajax Metal Processing opened in 1967, developing specialized
metal-processing services including plating, locking and sealing
metals, according to its website. The company, located on Gratiot
in Detroit's east side, could not be reached for comment.
Ajax Metal is represented by Kickham Hanley law firm based in Royal
Oak. Attorneys could not be reached for comment. [GN]
DRIVER PROVIDER: Salazar Bid for Certification of Claims Tossed
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Kelli Salazar, et al., v.
Driver Provider Phoenix LLC, et al., Case No. 2:19-cv-05760-SMB (D.
Ariz.), the Hon. Judge Susan M. Brnovich entered an order denying
the Plaintiffs' renewed motion for Rule 23 Certification of Claims
Under the Arizona Wage Act.
The Court further entered an order affirming the collective action
for minimum wage violations (which require no analysis of various
methods of payment but just hours worked) and overtime violations
based on minimum wage.
The Court said, "The Drivers did in fact have differing
expectations of how they would be paid. Therefore, there is no
common question as to whether Drivers should be compensated for the
pre- and post-shift work. Instead, the question requires individual
analysis of each
Driver's reasonable expectation and individual analysis of what
implied contract existed between each Driver and Driver Provider."
The Plaintiffs' Motion seeks class certification on Count II of the
Fifth Amended Complaint -- violation of the Arizona Wage Act
("AWA").
Previously the Court certified claims for violations of the Arizona
Minimum Wage Act as follows:
"All current and former employees of The Driver Provider who
performed chauffeur services in Arizona at any time from
December
6, 2016 to the present."
Excluded from the class are all owners, managers, supervisors,
dispatchers, or other employees whose primary job
responsibilities
were not the provision of chauffeur services.
Driver Provider is a transportation/trucking/railroad company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 18, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3tLk018 at no extra charge.[CC]
DUNKIN DONUTS: Faces Class Suit Over Hidden Automatic Surcharge
---------------------------------------------------------------
Elizabeta Ranxburgaj of The U.S. Sun reports that the potential
legal claim has accused the coffee chain of discrimination against
a certain group of customers.
This lawsuit alleged that Dunkin Donuts had discriminated through
its surcharges for dairy-free milk alternatives, according to
ClassAction.org.
Shoppers typically pay an extra $0.50 to $2.15 on their drink
orders to substitute regular dairy milk for an alternative like oat
milk, or almond milk.
This lawsuit was brought forward by 10 customers who were all
either lactose intolerant or allergic to dairy milk.
The plaintiffs claimed that the surcharge discriminated against
them and cited the Americans with Disabilities Act and
anti-discrimination laws from several states, as these two
conditions are legally considered disabilities.
They said there were "real and practical consequences" against
these people as they were supposedly being forced to pay higher
prices due to their conditions.
By making customers pay more for non-dairy or lactose-free milk,
the lawsuit claimed that Dunkin was profiting from this.
"Upon information and belief, Dunkin has earned over $250 million
dollars in the United States as a result of its discriminatory and
illegal levying of the Surcharge during the class period," the
lawsuit claimed. [GN]
ESO SOLUTIONS: Faces Class Suit Over Alleged Data Breach
--------------------------------------------------------
Jon Styf of Top Class Actions reports that ESO Solutions is facing
a pair of class action lawsuits in federal court in Austin, Texas,
claiming the company did not properly protect the health
information and personal identifying information (PII) of
customers.
Around Sept. 17, nearly 2.7 million individuals had their data
accessed in the ESO data breach. The stolen information included
medical treatment information as well as PII including names, phone
numbers, addresses and Social Security numbers, according to the
ESO class action lawsuits.
The improperly protected health information is a violation of the
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996
(HIPAA), the lawsuits claim.
The class members had worked to make sure their PII and health
information had remained private and protected but ESO Solutions
violated that, the lawsuits claim.
“Defendant, however, breached its numerous duties and obligations
by failing to implement and maintain reasonable safeguards; failing
to comply with industry-standard data security practices and
federal and state laws and regulations governing data security;
failing to properly train its employees on data security measures
and protocols; failing to timely recognize and detect unauthorized
third parties accessing its system and that substantial amounts of
data had been compromised; and failing to timely notify the
impacted class,” the lawsuits claim.
Data breaches are preventable through proper data practices,
lawsuits claim
Data breaches are preventable through employee training, the use of
firewalls, strong spam filters, incoming/outgoing message scans,
patch operating systems, anti-virus and anti-malware programs and
more, the ESO class action lawsuits claim.
Experian estimates that medical identity theft costs individuals an
average of $20,000 and most must pay out-of-pocket costs for
fraudulent medical expenses to restore their coverage, the lawsuits
claim.
Were you impacted by the ESO Solutions data breach? Let us know in
the comments.
The first plaintiff is represented by Joe Kendall of Kendall Law
Group PLLC and both Bryan L. Bleichner and Philip J. Krzeski of
Chestnut Cambronne PA.
The first ESO class action lawsuit is Essie Jones f/k/a Essie McVay
v. ESO Solutions Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-01557, in the U.S. District
Court for the Western District of Texas Austin Division.
The other plaintiff is represented by Joe Kendall of Kendall Law
Group PLLC and Alexandra M. Honeycutt of Milberg Coleman Bryson
Phillips Grossman LLC.
The second ESO class action lawsuit is Claybo v. ESO Solutions
Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-01560, in the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of Texas Austin Division. [GN]
EXELA TECHNOLOGIES: Court OK's Settlement in Shen Suit
------------------------------------------------------
Exela Technologies, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 30, 2023, that on December 7, 2023,
a final approval hearing took place and the United States District
Court, Northern District of Texas granted a settlement in full and
entered a final judgment of dismissal and final orders approving
the plan of allocation and plaintiffs' attorneys' fee award, which
will be paid entirely out of the existing settlement fund. Said
settlement agreement was preliminary approved by said court on
August 21, 2023.
On March 23, 2020, the plaintiff, Bo Shen, filed a putative class
action against the company, Ronald Cogburn, the company's former
Chief Executive Officer, and James Reynolds, the company's former
Chief Financial Officer. Plaintiff claims to have been a holder of
4,000 shares of company stock, purchased on October 4, 2019 at
$1.34/share (in the case of the number of shares and share price
without adjusting for any of the reverse stock splits occurring
after that date).
Plaintiff asserts two claims covering the purported class period of
March 16, 2018 to March 16, 2020: (1) a violation of Section 10(b)
and Rule 10b-5 of the Exchange Act against all defendants; and (2)
a violation of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act against Mr.
Cogburn and Mr. Reynolds. The allegations stem from the company's
press release, dated March 16, 2020 (announcing the postponement of
the earnings call and delay in filing of its annual report on Form
10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019), and press
release and related SEC filings, dated March 17, 2020 (announcing
its intent to restate its financial statements for 2017, 2018 and
interim periods through September 30, 2019) and certain other
matters.
On July 27, 2023, the parties submitted a settlement agreement to
the court that, if approved, will result in the dismissal of the
action with prejudice in exchange for a settlement payment of $5.0
million.
Exela Technologies, Inc. is an American business process automation
company.
FORWARD BANK: Fails to Safeguard Customers' Info, Hamilton Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
MATTHEW HAMILTON, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. FORWARD BANK and FORWARD FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC, Case
No. 3:23-cv-00844-wmc (W.D. Wis., Dec. 8, 2023) alleges that the
Defendants failed to properly secure and safeguard personal
identifiable information of the Defendant's current and former
customers.
The compromised information includes first and last names, Social
Security numbers, driver's license or other government ID numbers,
financial account information, and/or financial information.
The lawsuit asserts that the Defendant disregarded the rights of
the Plaintiff and Class Members by intentionally, willfully,
recklessly, or negligently failing to take adequate and reasonable
measures to ensure its data systems were protected against
unauthorized intrusions; failing to take standard and reasonably
available steps to prevent the Data Breach; and failing to provide
the Plaintiff and Class Members prompt and accurate notice of the
Data Breach.
As a result of the Data Breach, the Plaintiff and approximately
46,000 Class Members, suffered concrete injuries fact including
invasion of privacy; theft of their PII; lost or diminished value
of PII; lost time and opportunity costs associated with attempting
to mitigate the actual consequences of the Data Breach; and loss of
benefit of the bargain.
The Plaintiff and Class Members are current and former customers of
the Defendant.
Mr. Hamilton is a resident and citizen of Medford, Wisconsin. He
received the Notice Letter, via U.S. mail, directly from the
Defendant, dated November 17, 2023.
Forward is a Wisconsin-based bank and financial services provider
that provides financial products and/or services including "home
loans, improvement loans, consumer loans, and a complete variety of
commercial and agricultural loans; in addition to checking accounts
and a full range of savings programs."[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
TURKE & STRAUSS LLP
613 Williamson St., Suite 201
Madison, WI 53703
Telephone: (608) 237-1775
Facsimile: (608) 509-4423
E-mail: sam@turkestrauss.com
- and -
Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
PHILLIPS GROSSMAN LLC
227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (866) 252-0878
E-mail: gklinger@milberg.com
FRED HUTCHINSON: Fails to Protect Patients' Info, Doe Suit Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------------
JOHN DOE, on behalf of his minor child, JACK DOE, and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER CENTER,
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SCHOOL OF MEDICINE, UW MEDICAL CENTER,
HARBORVIEW MEDICAL CENTER, VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER, UW PHYSICIANS, UW
NEIGHBORHOOD CLINICS (d/b/a UW MEDICINE PRIMARY CARE), AIRLIFT
NORTHWEST, and CHILDREN'S UNIVERSITY MEDICAL GROUP, Case No.
2:23-cv-01893-JHC (W.D. Wash., Dec. 10, 2023) sues the Defendants
for failing to protect highly sensitive data -- which has resulted
in a flood of extortionary threats by cybercriminals to the
Defendants' current and former patients.
On November 19, 2023, the Defendants "detected unauthorized
activity on our clinical network." And yet, the Defendants waited
until December 2023 before they began notifying the Class.
Because of the Defendants' Data Breach, the sensitive PII/PHI of
the Plaintiff (Jack Doe) and Class members was placed into the
hands of cybercriminals -- inflicting numerous injuries and
significant damages upon the Plaintiff (Jack Doe) and Class
members, the lawsuit alleges.
Accordingly, the Class members have begun to receive "threatening
emails claiming names, Social Security numbers, medical history and
other data of more than 800,000 patients had been compromised." The
cybercriminals have then "demanded $50 to have the information [of
the Class] scrubbed from the dark web."
The Plaintiff has already received two of the extortionary message
detailed supra. This message demanded the Plaintiff pay the ransom
of $50 to have his highly sensitive information protected. As a
result of the Defendants' Data Breach, Plaintiff John Doe has
suffered -- and will continue to suffer from -- anxiety, sleep
disruption, stress, fear, and frustration. Such injuries go far
beyond allegations of mere worry or inconvenience.
Worryingly, this isn't the Defendants first data breach. After all,
The Defendants were also hacked on March 25, 2022. The next day,
the Defendants "discovered suspicious activity associated with a
single employee's business email account." And the Defendant
admitted that during that 2022 data breach, "an unauthorized
individual accessed the account."
Thus, this most recent Data Breach is simply part and parcel of the
Defendants' pattern of negligently inadequate data security, the
Plaintiff alleges, the lawsuit contends.
Plaintiff John Doe resides in Bainbridge Island, Washington, where
he intends to remain. He is the parent of his minor child, Jack
Doe. Jack Doe is a Data Breach victim, having received an email
from UW Medicine notifying him that Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center
had experienced a data breach and informing him that ransom demands
were being made directly to breach victims.
Fred Hutchinson is a cancer research institute established in 1975
in Seattle, Washington.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
TURKE & STRAUSS LLP
613 Williamson St., Suite 201
Madison, WI 53703-3515
Telephone: (608) 237-1775
Facsimile: (608) 509 4423
E-mail: sam@turkestrauss.com
INDEBTED USA: McKee Files FDCPA Suit in W.D. North Carolina
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against InDebted USA Inc. The
case is styled as Kathleen McKee also known as: Kathleen Albright,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
InDebted USA Inc., Case No. 3:23-cv-00815-FDW-DCK (W.D.N.C., Nov.
30, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.
InDebted -- https://www.indebted.co/en-us/ -- provides a debt
collection software that allows customers to effectively manage the
repayment of their overdue accounts.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yaakov Saks, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601-2726
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Fax: (201) 282-6501
Email: ysaks@steinsakslegal.com
- and -
C. Randolph Emory, Esq.
THE EMORY LAW FIRM, P.C.
11020 David Taylor Drive, Suite 102
Charlotte, NC 28262
Phone: (704) 371-4333
Fax: (704) 371-3015
Email: emorylawecf@gmail.com
INSIGNIA FINANCIAL: Court Dismisses Shareholders' Class Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
Jamie Williamson of Financial Standard reports that the class
action was commenced in February 2020 by Shine Lawyers, claiming
shareholders had suffered material losses because of failures by
management.
The group was accused of breaching its continuous disclosure
obligations and engaging in misleading and deceptive conduct
between March 2014 and July 2015 because it did not disclose to the
market material information that it was or ought to have been aware
of. This included issues with existing infrastructure and its
Research team, instances of suspected insider trading, plagiarism
of third-party research, and further compliance breaches.
The action alleged this lack of disclosure resulted in investors
paying inflated prices for their shares, which later dropped in
value due to the Royal Commission and other circumstances.
The accusations were rejected by the Honourable Justice Anderson on
20 December 2023, saying: "The evidence as a whole, does not rise
to the level of establishing a problem with IOOF's culture,
systems, governance and compliance during the Relevant Period."
The judge said it was not adequately demonstrated that issues
cited, including certain Bridges financial adviser bans, had any
impact on the company's share price. It was also pointed out by the
judge that some of the issues raised as evidence were public
knowledge, not information withheld by the group.
In all, it was determined that Insignia did not contravene the
Corporations Act, nor did it "engage in misleading or deceptive
conduct by silence."
Shine Lawyers acknowledged the court's decision in relation to the
class action, saying it is carefully reviewing the judgment. It
added that it is also considering an appeal and will provide an
update in due course.
Litigation Lending backed the action and is liable for any costs.
[GN]
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS: Faces Brawner Class Suit in S.D.N.Y.
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Brawner v.
International Business Machines Corporation, et al. The case is
captioned as Brawner v. International Business Machines Corporation
et al, Case No. 1:23-cv-10725-CM (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 8, 2023).
The suit alleges violations of fraud-related laws and is assigned
to the Hon. Judge Colleen McMahon.
International Business is an American computer manufacturer.[BN]
Plaintiff Daniel Brawner individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, is represented by:
Charles Foose Barrett, Esq.
BARRETT LAW OFFICE, P.A.
3319 West End Avenue, Suite 600
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 386-8391
Facsimile: (615) 386-8392
E-mail: cbarrett@nealharwell.com
JNJ LOGISTICS: Fails to Pay Drivers' Minimum, OT Wages Under FLSA
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DARWIN CONDE, JULIAN ANDRES NORENA MOLINA, EFREN ALEXANDER CONDE,
JUAN JOSE MARTINEZ, LIGIA JARAMILLO, and MARIA FERNANDA RODRIGUEZ,
individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. JNJ
LOGISTICS CORP. (D/B/A J&J LOGISTICS CORP.), KEWA LOGISTICS CORP.
(D/B/A KEWA LOGISTICS CORP.), TOBON CORP. (D/B/A TOBON CORP.),
LASERSHIP INC. (D/B/A LASERSHIP), JUAN PABLO SALAMANCA, JOHN
MARTINEZ, KARLA IDROVO, CHRISTIAN DURANGO SANTAMARIA, and WILSON
PARRAGA, Case No. 1:23-cv-09079-VMS (E.D.N.Y., Dec. 14, 2023) seeks
to recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages pursuant to the Fair
Labor Standards Act and for violations of the N.Y. Labor Law.
The Plaintiff contends that the Defendants maintained a policy and
practice of requiring the Plaintiffs and other employees to work in
excess of 40 hours per week without providing the minimum wage and
overtime compensation required by federal and state law and
regulations.
The Defendants also failed to maintain accurate recordkeeping of
the hours worked and failed to pay the Plaintiffs appropriately for
any hours worked, either at the straight rate of pay or for any
additional overtime premium, the suit claims.
The Plaintiffs seek certification of this action as a collective
action on behalf of themselves, individually, and all other
similarly situated employees and former employees of the
Defendants.
Plaintiffs Conde and Norena were employed as delivery workers and
drivers at the distribution centers located at 57-47 47th St,
Queens, NY 11378 from Nov. 2021 until early April 2023 and from
Aug. 10, 2022 until Dec. 21, 2022, respectively.
JNJ Logistics provides transport facility for freight and
cargo.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Catalina Sojo, Esq.
CSM LEGAL, P.C.
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
New York, NY 10165
Telephone: (212) 317-1200
Facsimile: (212) 317-1620
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Court Certifies Class Suit Over Talc Disclosures
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Fashion Network reports that a federal judge said Johnson & Johnson
shareholders may pursue as a class action their lawsuit accusing
the company of fraudulently concealing how its talc products were
contaminated by cancer-causing asbestos.
U.S. District Judge Zahid Quraishi in Trenton, New Jersey, on
December 29, 2023 allowed shareholders from Feb. 22, 2013, to Dec.
13, 2018, to pursue their securities fraud claims as a group.
He rejected J&J's argument that any class period be at least a year
shorter because some events that allegedly caused its stock price
to fall contained no "new" information.
J&J's talc products have included its signature baby powder. The
company stopped selling talc-based baby powder globally this year,
switching to corn starch as the main ingredient. It has said its
talc products are safe and do not contain asbestos.
"Johnson & Johnson always strives to provide truthful and fulsome
disclosures," Erik Haas, J&J's worldwide vice president of
litigation, said in a statement. "We will continue to vigorously
litigate cases that challenge the safety of our product or the
accuracy of our public statements."
Lawyers for shareholders including the lead plaintiff San Diego
County Employees Retirement Association did not immediately respond
to requests for comment.
Class actions make it easier for shareholders to recover more
money, at lower cost, than if they sued individually. A longer
class period could increase the amount recovered.
Shareholders said J&J's stock price fell six times in late 2017 and
2018 following events that confirmed how the New Brunswick, New
Jersey-based company and various executives hid the truth about
asbestos in its talc products.
These events included a jury awarding $4.69 billion in July 2018 to
22 women who said asbestos caused them to develop ovarian cancer,
and a Reuters report five months later that said J&J knew about the
asbestos risks for decades.
J&J said the six events could not have hurt its stock price because
none contained new information that "corrected" its earlier
disclosures.
It said the only new information from the verdict was that jurors
accepted the women's arguments, and that all 56 internal documents
mentioned in the Reuters report were already public.
Quraishi was unpersuaded. Addressing the Reuters report, he said
its "careful analysis" and providing of "necessary context" made it
more than a rehash of "stale information."
The share price fell 10% the day the report was released.
J&J also faces mass tort litigation encompassing more than 50,000
lawsuits over its talc products.
Courts have rejected two efforts by the company to use the
bankruptcy process to limit its exposure to talc litigation. [GN]
KIA AMERICA: Seeks To File Docs Under Seal in Sanchez Lawsuit
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Yandery Sanchez, Louise
Knudson, Andrea Reiher-Odom, Amber Witt, Mark Treston, Margaret
Ritzler, Hank Herber, Linda Wilbur, Thomas Rocco, Jerry Dubose,
April Fisher, and Tewana Nelson, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, v. Kia America, Inc. f/k/a Kia Motors
America, Inc., Case No. 8:20-cv-01604-JLS-KES (C.D. Cal.), Kia
submits an application for leave to file the following documents
under seal:
1. Portions of Kia's Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Class
Certification;
2. Portions of Kia's Motion to Exclude the Report and Testimony
of
Plaintiffs' Expert Witness Thomas L. Read, Ph.D.;
3. Portions of Kia's Motion to Exclude the Report and Testimony
of
Plaintiffs' Expert Witness Darren Manzari; and
4. Exhibits 1, 3, 13, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 27 to the Declaration
of
Michael L. Mallow in Support of Defendant Kia America,
Inc.'s:
1) Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification;
2) Motion to Exclude the Report and Testimony of Plaintiff's
Expert Witness Thomas Read, Ph.D.; and
3) Motion to Exclude the Report and Testimony of Darren
Manzari
and portions of Mallow Declaration Exhibits 14 and 20.
Kia America provides a wide range of cars that meet your
lifestyle.
A copy of the the Defendant's motion dated Dec. 18, 2023 is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41Ff8aC at no
extra charge.[CC]
The Defendant is represented by:
Michael L. Mallow, Esq.
Rachel A. Straus, Esq.
Amir Nassihi, Esq.
SHOOK, HARDY & BACON L.L.P.
2049 Century Park East, Suite 3000
Los Angeles, California 90067
Telephone: (424) 285-8330
Facsimile: (424) 204-9093
E-mail: mmallow@shb.com
rstraus@shb.com
anassihi@shb.com
MASTERBRAND INC: De Vejar Suit Moved from Super. Ct. to C.D. Cal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against MasterBrand, Inc. et
al. The case captioned as Carmen Estrella De Vejar v. MasterBrand,
Inc. et al., Case No. CIVSB2326755, was removed from San Bernardino
Superior Court to the United States District Court for the Central
District of California on Dec. 8, 2023.
The Central of California District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
5:23-cv-02514-KK-DTB to the proceedings.
The suit alleges violation of labor related laws andis assigned to
the Hon. Judge Kenly Kiya Kato.
MasterBrand operates as a wood kitchen cabinets company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Paul Keith Haines, Esq.
Alexandra Rochelle McIntosh, Esq.
Sean M Blakely, Esq.
HAINES LAW GROUP APC
2155 Campus Drive Suite 180
El Segundo, CA 90245
Telephone: (424) 292-2350
Facsimile: (424) 292-2355
E-mail: phaines@haineslawgroup.com
amcintosh@haineslawgroup.com
SBlakely@haineslawgroup.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Romtin Parvaresh, Esq.
Jonathan D. Meer, Esq.
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
2029 Century Park East Suite 3500
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 277-7200
Facsimile: (310) 201-5219
E-mail: rparvaresh@seyfarth.com
jmeer@seyfarth.com
MINERVA RESOURCES: Faces Pertrorock Suit Over Securities Fraud
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Minerva Resources,
LLC et al. The case is captioned as Pertrorock Mineral Holdings,
LLC et al v. Minerva Resources, LLC et al., Case No.
3:23-cv-02701-E (N.D. Tex., Dec. 8, 2023).
The suit alleges violation of Securities Fraud related laws
involving consumer credit and is assigned to the Hon. Judge Ada
Brown.
Minerva Resources is a manufacturer of M-sand and aggregates.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Carl A Smart, Esq.
Anthony Marquis Farmer, Esq.
THE FARMER LAW GROUP, PLLC
400 S. Zang Blvd, Suite 350
Dallas, TX 75208
Telephone: (214) 948-8333
Facsimile: (214) 915-8853
E-mail: csmart@farmerlawgroup.com
afarmer@farmerlawgroup.com
- and -
Dennis L Roossien, Esq.
MUNSCH HARDT KOPF & HARR PC
3800 Lincoln Plaza
500 N Akard St
Dallas, TX 75201
Telephone: (214) 855-7535
Facsimile: (214) 855-7584
E-mail: droossien@munsch.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Timothy C Shelby, Esq.
AHMAD, ZAVITSANOS & MENSING, PLLC
1221 McKinney Street, Suite 2500
Houston, TX 77010
Telephone: (713) 655-1101
E-mail: tshelby@azalaw.com
- and -
Walter J Cicack, Esq.
HAWASH CICACK & GASTON LLP
711 W Alabama St, Suite 200
Houston, TX 77006
Telephone: (713) 658-9003
Facsimile: (713) 658-9015
E-mail: wcicack@hcgllp.com
- and -
Lindsey H Raspino, Esq.
Michael K Oldham, Esq.
REYNOLDS FRIZZELL
1100 Louisiana Street, Suite 3500
Houston, TX 77002
Telephone: (713) 485-7200
Facsimile: (713) 485-7250
E-mail: lraspino@reynoldsfrizzell.com
oldham@reynoldsfrizzell.com
- and -
William David Dunn, Esq.
John David Blakley, Esq.
DUNN SHEEHAN LLP
5910 North Central Expressway, Suite 1310
Dallas, TX 75206
Telephone: (214) 855-0077
Facsimile: (214) 866-0070
E-mail: ddunn@dunnsheehan.com
jdblakley@dunnsheehan.com
- and -
Daniel D Tostrud, Esq.
Matthew Eric Last, Esq.
COBB MARTINEZ WOODWARD PLLC
1700 Pacific, Suite 3100
Dallas, TX 75201
Telephone: (214) 220-5220
Facsimile: (214) 220-5270
E-mail: dtostrud@cobbmartinez.com
mlast@cobbmartinez.com
NISSAN MOTOR: Doe Lawsuit Removed from Cir. Ct. to W.D. Missouri
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Nissan Motor
Acceptance Company LLC. The case captioned as Campbell v. Nissan
Motor Acceptance Company LLC, Case No. 23CN-CC00068, was removed
from the Circuit Court of Clinton County, MO to the United States
District Court for the Western District of Missouri on Dec. 8,
2023.
The Western District of Missouri Court Clerk assigned Case No.
5:23-cv-06161-SRB to the proceedings.
The suit alleges violations of contract related laws and is
assigned to the Hon. Judge Stephen R. Bough.
Nissan retails automobiles. The Company provides variety of new and
used cars, trucks, vans, and SUVs.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Charles Jason Brown, Esq.
Jayson A. Watkins, Esq.
BROWN & WATKINS, LLC
301 S. US 169 Highway
Gower, MO 64454
Telephone: (816) 505-4529
Facsimile: (816) 424-1337
E-mail: brown@brownandwatkins.com
watkins@brownandwatkins.com
- and -
Lauren Dollar, Esq.
Tim Eugene Dollar, Esq.
DOLLAR, BURNS, BECKER & HERSHEWE, L.C.
1100 Main Street, Suite 2600
Kansas City, MO 64105
Telephone: (816) 876-2600
Facsimile: (816) 221-8763
E-mail: lauren@dollar-law.com
timd@dollar-law.com
Defendant Nissan Motor Acceptance Company LLC is represented by:
Todd W. Ruskamp, Esq.
SHOOK, HARDY & BACON, LLP-KCMO
2555 Grand Boulevard
Kansas City, MO 64108-2613
Telephone: (816) 474-6550
Facsimile: (816) 421-5547
E-mail: truskamp@shb.com
ORANGE COUNTY, NY: Faces O'Hara Class Lawsuit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Orange County, New
York et al. The case is captioned as O'Hara v. Orange County, New
York et al, Case No. 7:23-cv-10770-KMK (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 11, 2023)
The nature of suit states Constitutional - State Statute.
The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Kenneth M. Karas.
Orange County is in southeastern New York State, directly north of
the New Jersey-New York border, and west of the Hudson River.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Paul L. Leclair, Esq.
LECLAIR KORONA GIORDANO COLE LLP
28 East Main Street, Suite 1500
Rochester, NY 14614
Telephone: (585) 327-4100
Facsimile: (585) 327-4200
E-mail: pleclair@adamsleclair.law
PACIFIC OFFICE: Canfield Lawsuit Removed from Sup. Ct. to S.D. Cal.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned as SHAWN CANFIELD, an
individual, on behalf of himself and all other aggrieved employees
v. PACIFIC OFFICE AUTOMATION, INC., an Oregon corporation; and DOES
1 through 25, inclusive, Case No. 37-2023-00041493-CU-OE-CTL (Filed
Sept. 5, 2023) was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California for the County of San Diego to the United States
District Court for the Southern District of California, on Dec. 8,
2023.
The Southern California District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
3:23-cv-02252-RBM-DDL to the proceeding.
The suit alleges Labor Code violations.
Specifically, the Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant's non-exempt
California employees were not paid for all hours worked or travel
time, were denied overtime pay, were not paid minimum wage, were
denied compliant meal and rest periods, were not provided with
regular paid sick leave or COVID-19 supplemental paid sick leave,
received inaccurate wage statements, and were not paid all earned
wages in a timely manner during employment and upon termination of
employment.
The Plaintiff works for the Defendants from his home in Temecula
and the Defendants' office in Los Angeles and also does service and
repair jobs for the Defendants in San Diego. The Plaintiff was
employed by the Defendants from December 27, 2021 and is still
currently employed.
Pacific Office provides office management solutions which includes
the service and repair of office scanners, copiers, printers and
fax machines.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Justin Hewgill, Esq.
HEWGILL COBB & LOCKARD, APC
1620 5th Avenue, Suite 325
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 432-2520
Facsimile: (619) 377-6026
E-mail: contact@hcl-lawfirm.com
- and -
Ben Travis, Esq.
BEN TRAVIS LAW, APC
4660 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 100
San Diego, CA 92122
Telephone: (619) 353-7966
E-mail: ben@bentravislaw.com
The Defendants are represented by:
John P. Lecrone, Esq.
Vandana Kapur, Esq.
Arielle J. Spinner, Esq.
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
865 South Figueroa Street, 24th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017-2566
Telephone: (213) 633-6800
Facsimile: (213) 633-6899
E-mail: johnlecrone@dwt.com
vandanakapur@dwt.com
ariellespinner@dwt.com
POSTMEDS INC: Faces Moran Class Action Lawsuit in N.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Postmeds, Inc. The
case is captioned as Moran v. Postmeds, Inc., Case No.
3:23-cv-06411-AGT (N.D. Cal., Dec. 13, 2023).
The nature of suit states Diversity-Personal Injury demanding $5M
in damages.
The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Alex G. Tse.
PostMeds provides online pharmacy delivery service.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bryan L. Bleichner, Esq.
CHESTNUT CAMBRONNE PA
100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 1700
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Telephone: (612) 339-7300
E-mail: bbleichner@chestnutcambronne.com
PRESSLER FELT: Kamal Files FDCPA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Pressler, Felt &
Warshaw, LLP. The case is styled as Annette O. Kamal, Hany M.
Kamal, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated
v. Pressler, Felt & Warshaw, LLP formerly known as: Pressler &
Pressler, LLP, LVNV Funding LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-10487-MKV
(S.D.N.Y., Nov. 30, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.
Pressler, Felt & Warshaw -- https://pfwattorneys.com/ -- offers a
unique debt collection approach.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Karim H. Kamal, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICE OF KARIM H. KAMAL
430 East 86th Street, Suite 14B
New York, NY 00000
Phone: (212) 586-0510
Fax: (212) 537-0012
Email: khklaw@gmail.com
PRIME COMMS RETAIL: Lewis-Joyner Suit Removed to C.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Cristian Lewis-Joyner, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Prime Comms Retail, LLC,
Does 1 through 20, inclusive, Case No. 23STCV12789 was removed from
the Superior Court of CA for the County of Los Angeles, to the U.S.
District Court for the Central District of California on Nov. 30,
2023.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:23-cv-10113-PA-JC to
the proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Other Labor for Labor/Mgmnt.
Relations.
Prime Communications, L.P. -- https://www.primecomms.com/ --
provides telecommunications services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Stuart Harris Kluft, Esq.
Jessica L. Campbell, Esq.
Kashif Haque, Esq.
Samuel A. Wong, Esq.
AEGIS LAW FIRM PC
9811 Irvine Center Drive Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92618
Phone: (949) 379-6250
Fax: (949) 379-6251
Email: skluft@aegislawfirm.com
jcampbell@aegislawfirm.com
khaque@aegislawfirm.com
swong@aegislawfirm.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Christopher William Decker, Esq.
Macy Valdes, Esq.
OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK AND STEWART PC
400 South Hope Street Suite 1200
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Phone: (213) 239-9800
Fax: (213) 239-9045
Email: christopher.decker@ogletree.com
macy.valdes@ogletree.com
PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE: Thompson Moved from Jud. Cir. to S.D. Ill.
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Prudential Insurance
Company of America et al. The case captioned as Thompson v. The
Prudential Insurance Company of America et al., Case No. 2023LA33,
was removed from Circuit Court of the 4th Jud. Cir., Effingham
County, IL, to the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Illinois on Dec. 11, 2023.
The Southern Illinois District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
3:23-cv-03904-NJR to the proceeding.
The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Nancy J. Rosenstengel.
Prudential provides life and group insurance.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew T. Heldut, Esq.
Timothy Patrick Kingsbury, Esq.
MCGUIRE LAW, P.C.
55 W. Wacker Drive, 9th Floor
Chicago, IL 60601
Telephone: (312) 893-7002
E-mail: aheldut@mcgpc.com
tkingsbury@mcgpc.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Debra Bogo-Ernst, Esq.
Laura Geist, Esq.
Amanda S. Amert, Esq.
WILLKIE, FARR & GALLAGHER LLP
300 North LaSalle Street, 50th Floor
Chicago, IL 60654
Telephone: (312) 728-9062
Facsimile: (312) 728-9199
E-mail: dernst@willkie.com
lgeist@willkie.com
aamert@willkie.com
REID HOSPITAL: Doe Lawsuit Removed from Super. Ct. to S.D. Indiana
------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against REID HOSPITAL &
HEALTH CARE SERVICES, INC. d/b/a REID HEALTH. The class action
lawsuit captioned as DOE v. REID HOSPITAL & HEALTH CARE SERVICES,
INC. d/b/a REID HEALTH, Case No. 89D01-2311-PL-000074, was removed
from the Wayne County Superior Court to the United States District
Court for Southern District of Indiana on Dec. 8, 2023.
The Southern Indiana District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
1:23-cv-02215-JMS-MKK to the proceeding.
The suit alleges violation of contract related laws.
The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Jane Magnus-Stinson.
Reid Hospital provides general medical and surgical hospital
services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue
Freedom Building, Ste 200
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 254-8801
Facsimile: (615) 250-3937
E-mail: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
- and -
Lynn A. Toops, Esq.
COHEN & MALAD LLP
One Indiana Square, Suite 1400
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Telephone: (317) 636-6481
Facsimile: (317) 636-2593
E-mail: ltoops@cohenandmalad.com
The Defendant is represented by
Kimberly C. Metzger, Esq.
MCCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP
880 West Monon Green Blvd., Suite 101
Carmel, IN 46032
Telephone: (317) 363-3232
E-mail: kmetzger@mccarter.com
RESTORATION HARDWARE: Azimi Suit Moved from Super. Ct. to C.D. Cal.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Restoration Hardware
Inc. The class action lawsuit captioned as Rana Azimi v.
Restoration Hardware Inc., Case No. 30-02023-01357668-CU-PO-CXC,
was removed from the Orange County Superior Court to the United
States District Court for the Central District of California on
Dec. 8, 2023.
The Central California District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
8:23-cv-02328-JWH-JDE to the proceeding.
The suit alleges violation of fraud related laws.
The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge John W. Holcomb.
Restoration Hardware provides home furnishing and hardware products
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Seyed Abbas Kazerounian, Esq.
David J McGlothlin, Esq.
Mona Amini, Esq.
KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP APC
245 Fischer Avenue Suite D1
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Telephone: (800) 400-6808
Facsimile: (800) 520-5523
E-mail: ak@kazlg.com
david@kazlg.com
mona@kazlg.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Claudia Maria Vetesi, Esq.
Tiffany Cheung, Esq.
MORRISON AND FOERSTER LLP
425 Market Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 268-7000
Facsimile: (415) 268-7522
E-mail: cvetesi@mofo.com
tcheung@mofo.com
SAN FRANCISCO, CA: Undergoes Transportation Overhaul as Settlement
------------------------------------------------------------------
Tony Ng of Hoodline reports that the Bay Area's disabled community
is poised for a transportation overhaul as BART gears up for major
accessibility improvements following a recent class action
settlement, according to information from Hoodline. BART's
commitment includes revamping station elevators and escalators,
ensuring fare gates remain operational for all users, and enhancing
staff training on disability access.
This lawsuit settlement could drastically alter commuting for those
with mobility disabilities.
Construction work at Bay Fair Station commences on January 3 and
spans four weeks, with all pedestrian detours remaining accessible
during this period.
All while BART's Accessibility Improvement Program moves forward
with station improvements like sidewalks and loading zones, the
effort will also upgrade vital amenities such as handrails, wall
detection, and lighting, as detailed in an update obtained by
BART's official news site.
Settlement terms from the 2017 legal action reveal that BART will
shell out a comprehensive capacity-building program aimed at
station agents and operation control center personnel, instructed
in disability access and etiquette, emergency preparedness, and
elevator downtime protocols, as reported by Hoodline. In the coming
16 years, the transit agency has agreed to refurbish 40 elevators
and commence a major escalator upgrade initiative within downtown
San Francisco and beyond.
Punctuality is key in these upgrades: when elevators go offline,
BART pledged to have repair teams respond within an hour; this plan
to bolster reliability and transparency for commuters will include
real-time notifications through various channels, including texts
and platform announcements.
The focus on efficiency also spills over into maintenance, with
System Service Workers having to arrive at stations to clean up
messes within 30 minutes after they're reported.
In addition to infrastructural improvements, the legal accord has
financial implications, with advocacy groups like Senior and
Disability Action and the Independent Living Resource Center of San
Francisco looking to receive a $15,000 service award. At the same
time, individuals Pi Ra and Ian Smith may get a cut of $7,500 each.
Whilst the settlement does not provide monetary relief to class
members, it does clear past and future claims relating to
accessibility law over the settlement's lifespan, the final
approval of which looms on April 18, 2024. [GN]
SELECT REHAB: Plaintiffs Seek to File Third Amended Complaint
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHRISTINE MCLAUGHLIN,
CRYSTAL VANDERVEEN, and JUSTIN LEMBKE, Individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, v. SELECT REHABILITATION LLC,
Case No. 3:22-cv-00059-HES-MCR (M.D. Fla.), the Plaintiffs ask the
Court to enter an order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 15(a)(2)
granting leave of Court for Plaintiffs to File and serve the
attached Third Amended Complaint and permitting Plaintiff Scott
Hardt join this action as a named Plaintiff and Representative of
the therapists' claims under the Illinois Minimum Wage Law (IMWL).
The operative complaint is Plaintiffs' Second Amended Complaint
(SAC), which includes claims under the Illinois Minimum Wage Law
("IMWL") for failure to pay overtime premiums to a class of
Therapists.
Select Rehabilitation provides healthcare services.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 18, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41FmtH4 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Mitchell Feldman, Esq.
FELDMAN LEGAL GROUP
6916 W. Linebaugh Ave #101
Tampa, FL 33625
Telephone: (813) 639-9366
Facsimile: (813) 639-9376
E-mail: mfeldman@flandgatrialattorneys.com
- and -
Benjamin Lee Williams, Esq.
WILLIAMS LAW P.A.
464 Sturdivant Ave
Atlantic Beach, FL 32233
Telephone: (904) 580-6060
Facsimile: (904) 417-7494
E-mail: bwilliams@williamslawjax.com
TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS: Greenhut Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Transworld Systems
Inc., et al. The case is styled as Mayer Greenhut, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Transworld Systems
Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-08844-MMH (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 30, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.
Transworld Systems Inc. -- https://tsico.com/ -- provides
receivables collection and management services. The Company focuses
on commercial, education, financial, government, healthcare, and
other industries in the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
UNITED BEHAVIORAL: LD Seeks to File Renewed Class Cert Bid
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LD, et al., v. United
Behavioral Health, Inc., et al., Case No. 4:20-cv-02254-YGR (N.D.
Cal.), the Parties request that the Court enter the below briefing
schedule for the Plaintiffs' renewed motion for class
certification:
Event Deadline
Parties Exchange Expert Designation Jan. 18, 2024
for Class Certification (including
Plaintiffs' rebuttal experts, if
any)
Plaintiffs' Renewed Motion for Jan. 25, 2024
Class Certification and Expert Reports:
Deadline for Depositions of Plaintiffs' Feb. 22, 2024
Experts:
Defendants' Response to Renewed Motion March 14, 20241
for Class Certification and Expert
Reports:
Deadline for Depositions of April 4, 2024
Defendants' Experts:
Deadline for Plaintiffs' Reply in April 25, 2024
Support of Renewed Motion for Class
Certification:
Deadline for Depositions of Plaintiffs' May 9, 2024
Rebuttal Experts, if any:
Hearing on Renewed Motion for Class May 22, 2024
Certification:
United was founded in 1996. The Company's line of business includes
providing management services on a contract and fee basis.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Dec. 18, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/41FXbIQ at no extra charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Matthew M. Lavin, Esq.
ARNALL GOLDEN GREGORY LLP
2100 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 350S
Washington, DC 20037
Telephone: (202) 677-4030
Facsimile: (202) 677-4031
E-mail: matt.lavin@agg.com
- and -
David M. Lilienstein, Esq.
Katie J. Spielman, Esq.
DL LAW GROUP
345 Franklin Street
San Francisco, CA 94102
Telephone: (415) 678-5050
Facsimile: (415) 358-8484
E-mail: david@dllawgroup.com
katie@dllawgroup.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Lauren M. Blas, Esq.
Geoffrey Sigler, Esq.
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 229-7000
Facsimile: (213) 229-7520
E-mail: LBlas@gibsondunn.com
GSigler@gibsondunn.com
- and -
Errol J. King, Jr., Esq.
PHELPS DUNBAR LLP
II City Plaza, 400 Convention Street, Suite 1100
Baton Rouge, LA 70802
Telephone: (225) 376-0207
Facsimile: (225) 381-9197
E-mail: Errol.King@phelps.com
UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS: Martinez Sues Over Discriminatory Employment
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Alberto Martinez and Emilio Zamora, individually and on behalf of
all other Hispanic faculty v. UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN, and
JAY HARTZELL, In his official and individual capacity, Case No.
1:23-cv-01574 (W.D. Tex., Dec. 28, 2023), is brought against
Defendant for violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964
("Title VII") by engaging in unlawful national origin/Hispanic
discriminatory employment practices to include disparate treatment
and disparate impact claims of discrimination and claims of
retaliation.
Both Plaintiffs began having informal conversations in 2017 and
2018 regarding their shared sense that UT was paying them at a
lower rate than fellow White faculty with equal lengths of service
and comparable records of scholarship, teaching, and service. Both
Plaintiffs went before the general faculty to propose an Equity
Committee to conduct a preliminary analysis of the available data
for their History Department. The department's Equity Committee was
started on May 2, 2018 and subsequently the results showed
disparity against Hispanic full Professors, but there was not a
response to take any action to rectify the disparities identified.
Both Plaintiffs then reached out to other Hispanic full Professors
in other Departments and learned that they were also experiencing
disparities compared to non-Hispanic full Professors. This group
approached Vice Provost Dr. Edmund Gordon in the summer of 2018 who
provided the Plaintiffs with charts that confirmed the Hispanic pay
disparities.
As a result of the consistent disparate treatment of Plaintiffs and
Class Members by UT and Hartzell, Plaintiffs and Class Members have
lost the following employment benefits: pay/compensation, career
advancement, retirement value, and interest.
The disparate treatment and discriminatory actions by UT and
Hartzel of Plaintiffs and putative class members, including the
ongoing failure to address, prevent or rectify discrimination
against Hispanic faculty, has caused loss of pay/compensation,
career advancement, retirement benefits, as well as compensatory
damages of emotional distress, damage to reputation, and other
damages, both in the past and continuing into the future.
UT and President Hartzell's facially neutral policies and practices
that have created a discriminatory disparate impact on the
Plaintiffs and putative class members have caused loss of
pay/compensation, career advancement, retirement benefits, as well
as other damages, both in the past and continuing into the future.
Hartzell's discriminatory and disparate treatment conduct,
including the ongoing failure to address, prevent or rectify
discrimination against Hispanic faculty, is intentional, willful,
egregious, and deliberate. As a result, Hartzell is subject to an
assessment of punitive damages appropriate to the economic and
non-economic damages and harms suffered by the Plaintiffs and
putative class members, so as to avoid future illegal conduct by UT
against Hispanic faculty as well as faculty from protected classes,
says the complaint.
The Plaintiffs who are Hispanic has been employed by UT in Austin,
Texas and are both full Professors in the History Department.
UT is a state agency and may be served through its President, Jay
Hartzell, as its top administrative representative.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert Notzon, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT NOTZON
1502 West Avenue
Austin, TX 78701
Phone: (512) 474-7563
Facsimile: (512) 852-4788
Email: Robert@NotzonLaw.com
- and -
Robert W. Schmidt, Esq.
ROBERT W. SCHMIDT LAW FIRM, PLLC
1502 West Avenue
Austin, TX 78701
Phone: (512) 484-2276
Facsimile: (512) 537-0708
Email: bob@robertwschmidt.com
VICTORIA'S SECRET: Salazar Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
---------------------------------------------------------------
Vivian Salazar, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. VICTORIA'S SECRET & CO., a Delaware Corporation; and
DOES 1 to 10, inclusive, Case No. 3:23-cv-06654 (N.D. Cal., Dec.
28, 2023), is brought to secure redress against the Defendant for
its failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website
to be fully and equally 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 products and services offered thereby and
in conjunction with its physical locations, is a violation of
Plaintiff's and the Class Member's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA") and California's Unruh Civil Rights Act
("Unruh Act"). Because Defendant's website, including but not
limited to https://www.victoriassecret.com/us/ (the "website" or
"Defendant's website"), is not fully or equally accessible to blind
and visually impaired consumers, resulting in violation of the ADA,
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, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using her
computer.
The Defendant owns, operates, and controls brick-and-mortar retail
stores.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Thiago M. Coelho, Esq.
Shahin Rezvani, Esq.
Jennifer M. Leinbach, Esq.
Jesenia A. Martinez, Esq.
Jesse S. Chen, SBN 336294
WILSHIRE LAW FIRM, PLC
3055 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Phone: (213) 381-9988
Facsimile: (213) 381-9989
Email: thiago@wilshirelawfirm.com
srezvani@wilshirelawfirm.com
jleinbach@wilshirelawfirm.com
jesenia.martinez@wilshirelawfirm.com
jchen@wilshirelawfirm.com
VICTORINOX SWISS ARMY: Calcano Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcos Calcano, on behalf of himself and all other persons
similarly situated v. VICTORINOX SWISS ARMY, INC., Case No.
1:23-cv-11272-JLR (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 28, 2023), is brought against the
Defendant for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and
operate its website to be fully accessible to and independently
usable by the 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 products and services offered thereby and
in conjunction with its physical location, is a violation of the
Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Because the Defendants' Website https://www.victorinox.com/us/en/,
is not equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers,
it violates the ADA. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to
cause a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices,
and procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and
remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, says
the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using his
computer.
The Defendant operates the Victorinox online retail store as well
as the Victorinox website and advertises, markets, and operates in
the State of New York and throughout the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, N.Y. 10003-2461
Phone: (212) 228-9795
Fax: (212) 982-6284
Email: Michael@Gottlieb.legal
Jeffrey@gottlieb.legal
Danalgottlieb@aol.com
VIOLET HOLDINGS: Woolbright Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Violet Holdings, LLC.
The case is styled as Lagena Renee Woolbright, individually and on
behalf of others similarly situated v. Violet Holdings, LLC d/b/a
Lincoln Meadows Care Center, Case No. S-CV-0051888 (Cal. Super.
Ct., Placer Cty., Dec. 27, 2023).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment."
Violet Holdings, LLC doing business as Lincoln Meadows Care Center
-- https://lincolnmeadowscarecenter.com/ -- is proud to be a
five-star, Medicare-certified, short-term rehabilitation and
skilled nursing home located in Lincoln, California.[BN]
VORNADO AIR LLC: McKelley Files Suit in D. South Carolina
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Vornado Air LLC. The
case is styled as Vera McKelley, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Vornado Air LLC, Case No.
4:23-cv-06981-RBH (D.S.C., Dec. 28, 2023).
The nature of suit is stated as Contract Product Liability.
Vornado -- https://www.vornado.com/ -- is an American firm based in
Andover, Kansas, that designs and manufactures household fans and
other small appliances related to air circulation.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Blake Garrett Abbott, Esq.
POULIN WILLEY ANASTOPOULO LLC
32 Ann Street
Charleston, SC 29403
Phone: (843) 834-4712
Email: blake@akimlawfirm.com
WELLARD LIMITED: Settles Shareholders' Class Action Suit for $23M
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Beef Central reports that Livestock shipping charterer and former
live exporter Wellard says it has agreed to pay $23 million to
settle a class action related to its ill-fated 2015 share market
float.
Wellard Limited stock opened at $1.39/share upon listing in
December 2015.
However, its share price plunged to 20c within 12 months, following
a series of profit downgrades blamed on rising Australian cattle
prices and mechanical problems with its livestock export vessels.
A class action was launched by law firm Quinn Emanuel Urquhart &
Sullivan on behalf of shareholders in March 2020, and financed by
litigation funder ICP Funding Pty Ltd.
ICP Funding Pty Ltd chief executive and founder John Walker told
Beef Central at the time that the class action alleged that the
prospectus which preceded the listing of Wellard Limited in
December 2015 contained forecasts that were "misleading and
deceptive".
In an announcement to the Australian Securities Exchange Wellard
Limited says the issue has now been fully and finally resolved
following pre-trial mediation and the execution of a Deed of
Settlement.
The announcement said the settlement "is without any admission of
liability on the part of the Company and is subject to Court
approval".
The total settlement amount has been agreed at A$23 million,
payment of which will be fully met from available insurance
proceeds, Wellard said.
The Company said it will advise the market of the Court’s
decision to approve or reject the settlement.
Wellard said the Class Action was brought on behalf of "a sub-set
of the persons" who acquired an interest in Wellard’s securities
at the time of the Company’s 2015 initial public offering and
between the date of the IPO and 31 August 2016.
"It concerned disclosures made by Wellard in the prospectus issued
in connection with the IPO, and to the ASX during the Relevant
Period," the Wellard statement said.
"Having regard to the period of time the has elapsed since the
Relevant Period, any further claims sought to be brought in respect
of the same circumstances would be statute barred by operation of
applicable limitation legislation".
Wellard Executive Chairman John Klepec said the company is "pleased
the matter has beeen resolved, “so we can focus on the operations
of the business".
"The settlement will not impact Wellard’s cashflow."
Wellard shares fell from 6c/share to 4c/share at the time of the
announcement of the class action. In the almost four years since
then, Wellard shares have traded at a high of 13c in October 2021
and January 2022, and are trading on January 8, 2024 at 4c/share.
[GN]
WEST SIDE LENDING: Sullivan Files Suit in D. Arizona
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against West Side Lending
LLC, et al. The case is styled as Sean Sullivan, individually and
on behalf of a class of similarly situated persons v. West Side
Lending LLC, Wolf River Development Company, New Platform Fund LLC,
North American Banking Company, Viking Client Services LLC, Red
Cypress Group doing business as: Valley Servicing, Case No.
3:23-cv-08635-JJT (D. Ariz., Dec. 28, 2023).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Statutes: Racketeer/Corrupt
Organization for Racketeering (RICO) Act.
West Side Lending LLC -- https://www.westsidelend.com/ -- is an
economic arm and instrumentality of the Menominee Indian Tribe of
Wisconsin.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David James McGlothlin, Esq.
Ryan Lee McBride, Esq.
KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP APC
301 East Bethany Home Road, Suite C-195
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Phone: (800) 400-6808
Fax: (800) 520-5523
Email: ryan@kazlg.com
ryan@kazlg.com
WESTLAKE CITY, OH: Fails to Pay Dispatchers' OT Wages Under FLSA
----------------------------------------------------------------
AMANDA HAMILTON, GREG WELLMAN, JOANNE SEGUL, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. CITY OF WESTLAKE, Ohio,
Case caption, Case No. 1:23-cv-02337 (N.D. Ohio, Dec. 7, 2023)
seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation pursuant to the Fair
Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiffs worked as 911 Dispatchers for the Defendant City of
Westlake, working within the City's Police Department.
In January 2020, the Plaintiffs and all others similarly situated
individuals began working a mix of eight-hour and twelve-hour
shifts. As part of that schedule change, the Defendant began paying
overtime only for hours worked over 80 on a bi-weekly basis.
The Defendant failed to pay overtime for all hours worked over 40
hours in a seven-day period through August 2022. At that point, the
collective bargaining agreement between the Ohio Patrolmen's
Benevolent Association (OPBA) and the Defendant was modified such
that the Plaintiffs and all other similarly situated individuals
started working 40 hours workweeks again. While this modification
in the work schedule remedied the violation prospectively, the
Defendant did not make any payments to compensate the Plaintiffs
and other similarly situated dispatchers for the years that they
were deprived overtime pay, the lawsuit alleges.
The Plaintiffs bring this action on their own behalf and on behalf
of all other current and former employees similarly situated to
them.
Westlake is a city in Cuyahoga County, Ohio. It is a suburb of
Cleveland located 12 miles west of downtown Cleveland.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Danielle M. Chaffin, Esq.
OHIO PATROLMEN'S BENEVOLENT ASSOCIATION
10147 Royalton Road, Suite J
North Royalton, OH 441333
Telephone: (440) 237-7900
Facsimile: (440) 237-6446
E-mail: dchaffin@opba.com
WESTLAKE PORTFOLIO: Bolton Files FDCPA Suit in C.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Westlake Portfolio
Management, LLC. The case is styled as Anitra Bolton, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Westlake
Portfolio Management, LLC, Case No. 2:23-cv-10854 (C.D. Cal., Dec.
28, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.
Westlake Portfolio Management -- https://www.wpmservicing.com/ --
offers solutions for finance companies, private investors, and loan
holders of auto loan portfolios.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jonathan Aaron Stieglitz, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF JONATHAN STIEGLITZ
11845 W. Olympic Blvd., Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90064
Phone: (323) 979-2063
Fax: (323) 488-6748
Email: jonathan.a.stieglitz@gmail.com
WINE WAY INC: Zelvin Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Wine Way, Inc. The
case is styled as Lynn Zelvin, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. Wine Way, Inc., Case No. 1:23-cv-11257-JGLC
(S.D.N.Y., Dec. 28, 2023).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Wine on the Way -- https://wineontheway.com/ -- is a digital store
that provides a wide range of champagne, red, white, rose, and
sparkling wines.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mars Khaimov, Esq.
10826 64th Avenue, Ste. 2nd Floor
Forest Hills, NY 11375
Phone: (917) 915-7415
Email: mars@khaimovlaw.com
*********
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 2024. 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 ***