/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/241115.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Friday, November 15, 2024, Vol. 26, No. 230
Headlines
3112 COMMODORE: Commercial Property Violates ADA, Longhini Claims
3M COMPANY: Dechent Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Greene Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Guilliams Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Hawkins Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Jackson Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Parris Seeks Leave to File Documents Under Seal
3M COMPANY: Parris Seeks to Certify Two Classes
A-PLUS CARE: Amended Class Cert Order Entered in Reed Lawsuit
AARP: Santoro Sues Over Sharing of Data Without Consent
ABERCROMBIE & FITCH: Court Grants Motion to Stay Bradberry Suit
ACADIA HEALTHCARE: Dyar Files Suit Over Share Price Drop
ADAPTHEALTH LLC: Seeks Leave to File Cox's Declaration Under Seal
AIRBNB INSURANCE: Consumers Sue Over Overcharged Travel Insurance
ALIGN TECHNOLOGY: Gross Law Investigates Securities Fraud Claims
ALLINA HEALTH: Gebhardt Consumer Suit Removed to D. Minn.
ALLSTATE INSURANCE: Thompson Sues Over Claims Adjusters' Unpaid OT
AMAZON.COM SERVICES: Betts Sues Over Unpaid Wages
APPLE INC: Faces Labella Suit Over Defective AirPods
AS PAVERS LLC: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime, Lopez Says
AXIOM ACQUISITION: Meza Suit Alleges Harassment, Retaliation
BATH & BODY: Torres Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
BIO-LAB INC: Exposes Residents to Hazardous Chemicals, Reece Says
BIO-LAB INC: Facility Fire Affects Businesses, Pittman Suit Says
BIOLAB INC: Humphrey Files Suit Over Toxic Chemical Exposure
BROWN INTEGRATED: Fails to Secure Employees' Info, Goins Alleges
BYOMA US: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Miller Suit Says
CAPGEMINI AMERICA: Fails to Properly Pay CSRs, Sidyan Suit Alleges
CLAY-PLATTE FAMILY: Sued Over Unauthorized Personal Info Disclosure
COURSEHORSE INC: Espinal Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
DOLE FOOD: Aguilar Sues Over Mislabeled Dole Whip Products
DP HOSPITALITY: Abramson Balks at Blind-Inaccessible Website
ELON MUSK: Faces McAferty Fraud Suit Over Breach of Contract
EMCORE CORP: M&A Probes Proposed Merger With Velocity One
FANTASY COOKIE: Aguilar Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
FIRSTSOURCE SOLUTIONS: Barry Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Kentucky
FLUX POWER: Artificially Inflated Stock Prices, Kassam Suit Says
FRANKLIN RESOURCES: Rosen Law Probes Potential Securities Claims
FUJIYA LLC: Fonseca Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages for Restaurant Staff
GAMETIME UNITED: Espinal Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
GMZEP CONSULTING: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Mora Claims
GOODRX INC: Keaveny Drug Balks at Illegal Price-Fixing Scheme
GRATEFUL HEARTS: Underpays Home Health Employees, Seals Suit Claims
GREENFIELD PARK: Settles Sex Abuse Class Action of Deceased Coach
HALEON US: Mislabels Dental Care Products, Cross Alleges
HERSHEY CO: Chocolate Product Contains PFAS, Santos Suit Says
HISENSE USA: Deyell Sues Over Defective Smart TV Products
HOLMAN AUTOMOTIVE: Vyas Sues Over Work Discrimination & Retaliation
HONDA DEVELOPMENT: Faces Hill Suit Over Unpaid Overtime
HOUSE OF MACADAMIAS: Young Seeks Equal Website Access for Blind
HYATT CORPORATION: Sadik Files Suit in S.D. California
HYDRO EXTRUSION: Creasey Files Suit in Pa. Ct. of Common Pleas
INTERNATIONAL DIRECTIONAL: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Suit Says
IPW INDUSTRIES: Reid Sues Over Website's Barriers to Blind Users
J&H TACKLE: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Fernandez Alleges
J&L SKY CONTRACTORS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Lopez Alleges
JB HUNT: Faces Lee Suit Over Truck Drivers' Unpaid Overtime
JCS INVESTIGATIONS: Coleman Sues Over Failure to Overtime Wages
JETTY LIFE: Gaspa Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
JOHN DOES: American Civil Liberties Sues Over Voter Intimidation
JP MORGAN: Santourian Suit Removed to C.D. California
K-MAC ENTERPRISES: Austin Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation
KANES FURNITURE: Blind Can't Access Online Store, Alexandria Says
KEURIG DR PEPPER: Elliot Files Suit Over Beverages' False Ads
KIDPIK CORP: M&A Investigates Proposed Merger With Nina Footwear
LANDMARK ADMIN: Fails to Secure Customers' Info, Montague Says
LANDMARK ADMIN: Fails to Secure Customers' Personal Info, Suit Says
LIFEHOUSE INC: Simmons Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
LILIUM N.V.: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set January 6, 2025
LOUDPACK EXOTICS: Saunders Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
MARC SIEBERT: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Fernandez Says
MATCH GROUP: Rosen Law Investigates Potential Securities Claims
MEIJER INC: Macaroni Products Contain Preservatives, Most Suit Says
MIDNIGHT HUB: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set January 6
NEW YORK MAN: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Sumlin Suit Says
NOBLE & COOLEY: Delacruz Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
PEPSICO BEVERAGE: Teamsters Sues Over Mass Layoff Without Notice
PINE ISLAND: Fails to Pay Minimum & OT Wages, King Suit Says
PLUS500US FINANCIAL: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Miller Says
PROCTER & GAMBLE: Pinto Sues Over Plug-In Air Fresheners' False Ads
RASA FLOORS: Soriano Seeks Unpaid Overtime for Floor Installers
RETAIL OPPORTUNITY: M&A Probes Proposed Merger With Blackstone
SAINT XAVIER: Fails to Protect Applicants' Info, Martinez Alleges
SKI HUT: Jones Sues Over Blind Users' Equal Access to Online Store
STRIDE INC: Rosen Law Investigates Potential Securities Claims
T-MOBILE USA: Charges Hidden Fees; Refuses to Arbitrate, Beets Says
TD BANK: Faces Chiew Suit Over Improper Fees, Interest Charges
TIMKEN CO: Faces Landi Wage-and-Hour Suit in N.D. Ohio
TMC THE METALS CO: Faces Shareholder Class Action Lawsuit
UNISYS CORP: Rosen Law Probes Potential Securities Claims
UNITED STATES: Cortez Seeks Damages for Breach of Contract
VANGUARD GROUP: Agrees to Settle Retirement Funds Suit for $40MM
VIVENDI TICKETING: Faces Schoen Suit Over Hidden Ticket Charges
WECULTURE FOUNDERS: Faces Temoxtle Wage-and-Hour Suit in M.D. Fla.
WELCOME WAGON: Faces Seifter Wage-and-Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y.
WELLS FARGO BANK: Penuela Suit Transferred to S.D. California
WILTON REASSURANCE: Faces Ortiz-Diaz Suit Over Untimely Payments
WORLD FINER: Robinson Sues Over Mislabeled Cracker Products
ZANDER GROUP: Plaintiff Seeks to Quash Subpoena to Produce Docs
ZOOMCAR INDIA: Moran Sues Over Breach of Employment Agreement
Asbestos Litigation
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Albany Int'l. Has 3,642 PI Claims as of Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Carlisle Cos. Faces Products Liability Lawsuits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Chubb Ltd. Increases A&E Reserves by $47M
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Colgate-Palmolive Defends 313 Cases at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Columbus McKinnon Estimates $4.9MM Net Liability
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Flowserve Corp. Faces 667 New PI Lawsuits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: IDEX Corp. Defends PI Lawsuits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Minerals Tech Has 663 Exposure Cases as of Sept. 2
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Rogers Corp. Has 516 Exposure Claims Outstanding
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Trane Tech Defends Exposure Lawsuits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Carbide Has 4,407 Pending Claims at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: WAG Defends Product Liability Lawsuits
*********
3112 COMMODORE: Commercial Property Violates ADA, Longhini Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DOUG LONGHINI v. 3112 COMMODORE PLAZA INVESTMENTS, LLC, and BARTACO
COCONUT GROVE, LLC d/b/a BARTACO, Case No. 1:24-cv-24344 (S.D.
Fla., Nov. 5, 2024) is a class action contending that the
Defendants have discriminated against the individual Plaintiff by
denying him access to, and full and equal enjoyment of, the goods,
services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or accommodations
of the Commercial Property and businesses located in it, as
prohibited by the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The individual Plaintiff visits the Commercial Property and
businesses located within the commercial property, to include a
visit on Oct. 11, 2024, and encountered multiple violations of the
ADA that directly affected his ability to use and enjoy the
Commercial Property. He plans to return to the Commercial Property
within two months of the filing of this Complaint, in order to
avail himself of the goods and services offered at the place of
public accommodation and check if it has been remediated of the ADA
violations he encountered. The Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief,
attorneys' fees, litigation expenses, and costs pursuant to ADA.
Plaintiff Longhini is an individual with disabilities as defined by
and pursuant to the ADA. The Plaintiff uses a wheelchair to
ambulate.
3112 Commodore owned and operated the commercial buildings located
at 3112 Commodore Plaza, Miami, Florida, 33133.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Beverly Virues, Esq.
Armando Mejias, Esq.
GARCIA-MENOCAL, P.L.
350 Sevilla Avenue, Suite 200
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Telephone: (305) 553-3464
Facsimile: (855) 205-6904
E-mail: bvirues@lawgmp.com
amejias@lawgmp.com
jacosta@lawgmp.com
aquezada@lawgmp.com
- and -
Ramon J. Diego, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICE OF RAMON J. DIEGO, P.A.
5001 SW 74th Court, Suite 103
Miami, FL 33155
Telephone: (305) 350-3103
E-nail: rdiego@lawgmp.com
ramon@rjdiegolaw.com
3M COMPANY: Dechent Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
-------------------------------------------------------------
Ronald Dechent, 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; 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.); Case No. 2:24-cv-05355-RMG
(D.S.C., Sept. 26, 2024), is brought for damages for personal
injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams
("AFFF") and firefighter turnout gear ("TOG") 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
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendants' AFFF or TOG 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 or TOG 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:
Constantine Venizelos, Esq.
CONSTANT LEGAL GROUP LLP
737 Bolivar Rd., Suite 440
Cleveland, OH 44115
Phone: 216-815-9000
Facsimile: 216-274-9365
3M COMPANY: Greene Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
------------------------------------------------------------
William Greene, 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; 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.); Case No. 2:24-cv-05342-RMG
(D.S.C., Sept. 26, 2024), is brought for damages for personal
injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams
("AFFF") and firefighter turnout gear ("TOG") 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
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendants' AFFF or TOG 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 or TOG 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:
Constantine Venizelos, Esq.
CONSTANT LEGAL GROUP LLP
737 Bolivar Rd., Suite 440
Cleveland, OH 44115
Phone: 216-815-9000
Facsimile: 216-274-9365
3M COMPANY: Guilliams Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
---------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Guilliams, 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; 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.); Case No. 2:24-cv-05353-RMG
(D.S.C., Sept. 26, 2024), is brought for damages for personal
injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams
("AFFF") and firefighter turnout gear ("TOG") 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
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendants' AFFF or TOG 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 or TOG 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 ulcerative
colitis 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:
Constantine Venizelos, Esq.
CONSTANT LEGAL GROUP LLP
737 Bolivar Rd., Suite 440
Cleveland, OH 44115
Phone: 216-815-9000
Facsimile: 216-274-9365
3M COMPANY: Hawkins Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
-------------------------------------------------------------
Victor Hawkins, 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; 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.); Case No. 2:24-cv-05343-RMG
(D.S.C., Sept. 26, 2024), is brought for damages for personal
injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams
("AFFF") and firefighter turnout gear ("TOG") 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
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendants' AFFF or TOG 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 or TOG 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 ulcerative
colitis 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:
Constantine Venizelos, Esq.
CONSTANT LEGAL GROUP LLP
737 Bolivar Rd., Suite 440
Cleveland, OH 44115
Phone: 216-815-9000
Facsimile: 216-274-9365
3M COMPANY: Jackson Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
-------------------------------------------------------------
Tommie Jackson, 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; 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.); Case No. 2:24-cv-05348-RMG
(D.S.C., Sept. 26, 2024), is brought for damages for personal
injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams
("AFFF") and firefighter turnout gear ("TOG") 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
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendants' AFFF or TOG 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 or TOG 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:
Constantine Venizelos, Esq.
CONSTANT LEGAL GROUP LLP
737 Bolivar Rd., Suite 440
Cleveland, OH 44115
Phone: 216-815-9000
Facsimile: 216-274-9365
3M COMPANY: Parris Seeks Leave to File Documents Under Seal
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as EARL PARRIS, JR.,
Individually, and on Behalf of a Class of Persons Similarly
Situated, Plaintiff, v. 3M COMPANY, et al., Case No.
4:21-cv-00040-TWT (N.D. Ga.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter
an order granting motion for leave to file documents under seal.
Pursuant to section II(J)(2)(a), the Plaintiff is filing under
provisional seal his Motion for Class Certification. The motion
cites and relies on several documents produced by Defendants that
are marked as confidential. Plaintiff has also filed the documents
marked confidential as provisionally sealed.
The Plaintiff opposes sealing but files this Motion as directed by
Appendix H. Defendants bear the burden of demonstrating why sealing
is necessary; showing why less drastic alternatives are inadequate;
and addressing factors governing the sealing of documents.
3M Company is an American multinational conglomerate operating in
the fields of industry, worker safety, and consumer goods.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Nov. 1, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5nPp1e at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gary A. Davis, Esq.
Keith A. Johnston, Esq.
Louis W. Ringger, III, Esq.
DAVIS, JOHNSTON, & RINGGER, PC
21 Battery Park Avenue, Suite 206
Asheville, NC 28801
Telephone: (828) 622-0044
Facsimile: (828) 398-0435
E-mail: gadavis@enviroattorney.com
kjohnston@enviroattorney.com
- and –
Thomas Causby, Esq.
101 E. Crawford St.
Dalton, GA 30720
Telephone: (706) 226-0300
Facsimile: (706) 229-4363
E-mail: tom@causbyfirm.com
3M COMPANY: Parris Seeks to Certify Two Classes
-----------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as EARL PARRIS, JR.,
Individually, and on Behalf of a Class of Persons Similarly
Situated,
v. 3M COMPANY, et al., Case No. 4:21-cv-00040-TWT (N.D. Ga.), the
Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order certifying two similar,
ascertainable classes:
Damages Class – All rate payers of water and sewer service with
the City of Summerville from January 2020 through class
certification.
Injunction Class – All account holders of water service with the
City of Summerville at the time of class certification
All class members share the same injury in the pollution of
Summerville's drinking water, and all class members have and will
continue to pay increased rates to remove PFAS from their potable
water.
The Defendants have contaminated the City of Summerville's drinking
water supply through its intake point in Raccoon creek, and this
allegation applies generally to the Injunction Class because all
receive potable water from the intake point.
Broadly, the Injunction Class seeks injunctive relief in the form
of abatement and remediation of the nuisance. This would involve,
in the short term, providing temporary clean drinking water to the
Injunction Class members. A longer-term remedy would involve the
installation of a permanent GAC treatment system for the City's
water treatment plant, so that all members receive clean drinking
water through their taps
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Nov. 1, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=DwJt9M at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gary A. Davis, Esq.
Keith A. Johnston, Esq.
Louis W. Ringger, III, Esq.
DAVIS, JOHNSTON, & RINGGER, PC
21 Battery Park Avenue, Suite 206
Asheville, NC 28801
Telephone: (828) 622-0044
Facsimile: (828) 398-0435
E-mail: gadavis@enviroattorney.com
kjohnston@enviroattorney.com
- and –
Thomas Causby, Esq.
101 E. Crawford St.
Dalton, GA 30720
Telephone: (706) 226-0300
Facsimile: (706) 229-4363
E-mail: tom@causbyfirm.com
A-PLUS CARE: Amended Class Cert Order Entered in Reed Lawsuit
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LOUISE REED, Individually
and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. A-PLUS CARE HHC
INC. et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01163-JPC-SDA (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon.
Judge John Cronan entered an amended order of reference to a
Magistrate Judge :
-- General Pretrial (includes scheduling, discovery,
non-dispositive
pretrial motions, and settlement)
-- Dispositive Motion (i.e., motion requiring a Report and
Recommendation).
A-Plus Care is a licensed home care agency providing home care
services to the New York Metropolitan area.
A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 1, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=RfAORm at no extra
charge.[CC]
AARP: Santoro Sues Over Sharing of Data Without Consent
-------------------------------------------------------
CLARK SANTORO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. AARP, a Washington D.C. non-profit; and DOES
1 through 25, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-09628 (C.D.
Cal., Nov. 7, 2024) alleges violation of the Children's Internet
Protection Act.
According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, the Defendant did not
obtain Class Members' express or implied consent to be subjected to
data sharing with TikTok for the purposes of fingerprinting and
de-anonymization.
American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) is a non-profit
organization for the senior community. The Company offers
automobile and homeowners insurance, as well as producing
magazines. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert Tauler, Esq.
Narain Kumar, Esq.
TAULER SMITH LLP
626 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 550
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Telephone: (213) 927-9270
Email: robert@taulersmith.com
nkumar@taulersmith.com
ABERCROMBIE & FITCH: Court Grants Motion to Stay Bradberry Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the case captioned as DAVID BRADBERRY, Plaintiff, -against-
ABERCROMBIE & FITCH CO., MICHAEL S. JEFFRIES, MATTHEW SMITH, AND
THE JEFFRIES FAMILY OFFICE, LLC, Defendants, 23-cv-9440 (JHR) (OTW)
(S.D.N.Y.), Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang granted the defendants'
motion to stay this action pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1595(b).
Defendants previously filed a motion to stay under the Trafficking
Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, which Judge Rearden denied
without prejudice to renewal on August 23, 2024. At the time,
Defendants indicated that at least one investigative subpoena had
been served on the Jeffries Family Office, and that the subpoena
"mirrored the Plaintiff's allegations that Defendants engaged in
sex-trafficking with the support and financial backing of Defendant
Abercrombie and Fitch Co." No Defendants had yet been criminally
charged, nor did any other Defendant report having received an
investigative subpoena or being told that they were a subject or
target of the investigation. Judge Rearden denied the stay because,
at that time, it was not readily apparent that (1) the civil and
criminal case arose out of the same occurrence and (2) that the
Plaintiff in this case is a victim in the criminal action.
On October 17, 2024, Defendants Jeffries and Smith were indicted in
the Eastern District of New York on one count of sex trafficking
and fifteen counts of interstate prostitution.
Defendants filed their renewed motion to stay this case on October
24, 2024.
On October 24, 2024, one week after Jeffries and Smith were
indicted, Defendants filed a renewed motion to stay under the
TVPRA's mandatory stay provision. Defendants have now shown that a
mandatory stay of this case is required under the TVPRA.
First, there is a criminal action pending against at least two of
the Defendants in this case. On October 17, 2024, a Grand Jury in
the Eastern District of New York indicted defendants Jeffries and
Smith on charges of sex trafficking and interstate prostitution,
alleging that Jeffries and Smith operated an international sex
trafficking and prostitution business.
Second, Defendants have adequately alleged that the criminal action
arises out of the same occurrence as this putative class action. In
this case, Bradberry alleges that between 1992 and 2014, Jeffries
used Abercrombie money, travel benefits, and cash to facilitate and
effectuate the sex trafficking venture against this Class.
Finally, Defendants' acts against Bradberry, as pleaded in the
Civil Complaint filed in 2023, closely parallel the criminal acts
alleged in the Indictment filed barely over a week ago. In the
Civil Complaint, Bradberry alleges that in 2010, he was contacted
for a meeting to advance his modeling career and was told that, if
the meeting went well, he would be introduced to the Jeffries.
Bradberry went to the initial meeting, was forced to engage in
commercial sex acts, and was later trafficked to Washington D.C.
and London where he was then forced to engage in commercial sex
acts with Jeffries and others. These alleged facts match
allegations in the Indictment, which alleges that Jeffries's and
Smith's sex-trafficking activities took place between 2008 and
2015, where they paid dozens of men, including, among others, John
Does #1 through #15 to meet JEFFRIES and SMITH in various locations
for the purposes of engaging in commercial sex acts.
Accordingly, Defendants' motion to stay is granted, Plaintiff and
the Department of Justice may file a response or opposition to
Defendants' motion to stay, if any, by November 8, 2024.
Defendants' reply, if any, is due November 15, 2024. The parties
are further directed to inform the Department of Justice of this
Order. If neither Plaintiff nor the United States files any
objection to this stay by November 8, 2024, the Court may assume
that Plaintiff and/or the United States do not object to this case
being stayed under the TVPRA
On October 25, 2024, this Court granted Defendants' motion for an
extension of time to file their replies in support of their motions
to dismiss and motion to stay discovery. In light of the stay of
the entire case, Defendants' motion to adjourn the reply brief
deadlines is denied as moot.
A copy of the Court's Order is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=93cC4p
ACADIA HEALTHCARE: Dyar Files Suit Over Share Price Drop
--------------------------------------------------------
PATRICK DYAR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ACADIA HEALTHCARE COMPANY, INC., DEBRA K.
OSTEEN, CHRISTOPHER H. HUNTER, DAVID M. DUCKWORTH, and HEATHER
DIXON, Defendants, Case No. 3:24-cv-01300 (M.D. Tenn., October 29,
2024) is a class action on behalf of the Plaintiff and all persons
and entities that purchased or acquired Acadia securities between
February 28, 2020 and October 18, 2024, inclusive, asserting claims
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder against the Defendants.
Defendant Hunter touted Acadia's "very strong partnerships with our
payer partners," providing further assurance as to the
sustainability and legitimacy of the Company's revenue base.
According to Defendant Osteen, Acadia was "providing exceptional
patient care," and that the Company has "had very steady referrals
from the ERs" because it was "important to the ERs that their
patients get to the right place and that they get the care" they
needed.
According to the complaint, contrary to the statements, Acadia's
business was built on disturbing and unsustainable practices. The
Company's "record demand" -- including increases in revenue per day
and patient days -- was driven by defrauding insurers to cover
longer patient stays by exaggerating patients' symptoms and
altering medical dosages, often holding patients until their
coverage ran out. The Company also routinely exploited laws to
exceed the legal limits for holding patients against their will --
allowing them to continue to charge their insurance -- by filing
petitions to extend patients' involuntary stays, says the suit.
On September 27, 2024, Acadia disclosed that it had "received a
voluntary request for information from the United States Attorney's
Office for the Southern District of New York" and "a grand jury
subpoena from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Missouri related to its admissions, length of stay and
billing practices."
On October 18, 2024, The New York Times published an article titled
"Veterans Dept. Investigating Acadia Healthcare for Insurance
Fraud," stating that the "Veterans Affairs Department is
investigating whether Acadia . . . is defrauding government health
insurance programs by holding patients longer than is medically
necessary."
On this news, the price of Acadia stock fell about 12%, from $59.32
per share on October 17, 2024, to $52.03 per share on October 18,
2024, on unusually high trading volume.
Acadia Healthcare Company, Inc. provides behavioral healthcare
services in the United States and Puerto Rico.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 254-8801
Facsimile: (615) 255-5419
E-mail: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
- and -
Javier Bleichmar, Esq.
BLEICHMAR FONTI & AULD LLP
300 Park Avenue, Suite 1301
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (212) 789-1340
Facsimile: (212) 205-3960
E-mail: jbleichmar@bfalaw.com
- and -
Ross Shikowitz, Esq.
BLEICHMAR FONTI & AULD LLP
75 Virginia Road
White Plains, NY 10603
Telephone: (914) 265-2991
Facsimile: (212) 205-3960
E-mail: rshikowitz@bfalaw.com
- and -
Adam C. McCall, Esq.
BLEICHMAR FONTI & AULD LLP
1330 Broadway, Suite 630
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: (415) 445-4003
Facsimile: (212) 205-3960
E-mail: amccall@bfalaw.com
ADAPTHEALTH LLC: Seeks Leave to File Cox's Declaration Under Seal
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DILLON MYRICK, v.
ADAPTHEALTH LLC; HOME MEDICAL EXPRESS, INC., Case No.
6:22-cv-00484-JDK (E.D. Tex.), the Defendants ask the Court to
enter an order granting their motion for leave to file Matthew
Cox's Declaration under seal for their response in opposition to
plaintiff Dillon Myrick's motion for class certification.
AdaptHealth operates as a full-service home medical equipment
company.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Nov. 1, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=vhShCV at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Joseph C. Wylie II, Esq.
Nicole C. Mueller, Esq.
Clayton L. Falls, Esq.
K&L GATES LLP
70 W. Madison St., Suite 3100
Chicago, IL 60602
Telephone: (312) 372-1121
Facsimile: (312) 827-8000
E-mail: joseph.wylie@klgates.com
nicole.mueller@klgates.com
clayton.falls@klgates.com
AIRBNB INSURANCE: Consumers Sue Over Overcharged Travel Insurance
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Kelly Mehorter of ClassAction.org reports that two Washington
residents claim in a proposed class action lawsuit that they were
illegally overcharged for travel insurance purchased on
Airbnb.com.
The 24-page lawsuit alleges Airbnb Insurance Agency and a U.S.
branch of an Italian insurance company, Generali Assicurazioni
Generali S.p.A., unfairly charge Washington customers a hidden,
unapproved fee for non-insurance services when they buy travel
insurance to protect their Airbnb reservations.
Under Washington law, insurers and their agents are required to
submit their premium plans to the state's insurance commissioner
for approval and are prohibited from charging any rates or fees
above those that are approved, the complaint says.
According to the case, the defendants have attempted to circumvent
these laws by automatically charging customers additional fees for
"assistance services" on top of the approved premium they charge
customers for travel insurance. Per the filing, these services
purportedly allow insureds to call customer service representatives
to receive "roadside assistance."
"Most, if not all, of the services and benefits [Airbnb and
Generali] call 'non-insurance' or 'assistance services' are, in
fact, part of the insurance contract and are subject to the
approved rate, and [the defendants] are not allowed to charge extra
for them," the case contends.
Washington law also states that an insurance agent like Airbnb
cannot collect any extra fees in connection with the procurement of
insurance unless it gets written permission from customers agreeing
to those fees and provides written disclosure of the compensation
it receives from both the consumer and the insurer, the suit says.
"Consumers are not afforded any opportunity to decline these
assistance services, or the associated charge in the offer or
purchase process, nor is any information disclosed to consumers on
assistance pricing distinguished from insurance pricing," the
lawsuit shares.
The plaintiffs claim that when they bought travel insurance on
Airbnb.com, they had no idea they were paying extra for assistance
and other non-insurance services. The consumers would not have
overpaid had Airbnb and Generali complied with Washington law and
charged them only an approved premium, the filing alleges.
Most consumers would not pay for the assistance services if given
an informed choice, the complaint argues, adding that these fees
are significantly higher than the "relatively low costs" Airbnb and
Generali incur to provide such services.
"Regardless of how [the defendants'] 'assistance' fees are
ultimately characterized -- whether as an artifice to collect an
unlawful agent's fee or unauthorized premium or as genuinely for
non-insurance services (that no one has chosen and that few people
would pay for if given the choice) -- the result is the same:
[Airbnb and Generali] collect more from consumers than they
should," the suit claims.
The Airbnb lawsuit looks to represent any Washington residents who
purchased travel insurance from Generali during the class period
and were charged a fee for the supposed assistance services or
benefits included with the company's travel insurance contracts on
top of the applicable insurance premium rate it was authorized to
charge for their travel insurance. [GN]
ALIGN TECHNOLOGY: Gross Law Investigates Securities Fraud Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Gross Law Firm issues a notice to shareholders of Align
Technology, Inc. stating that on July 26, 2023, Align reported its
Q2 2023 earnings and offered guidance for Q3 2023 and revised
upwards its full-year 2023 guidance. During the call Align officers
stated that its product portfolio was largely resilient to
inflation and other negative economic trends. However, on October
25, 2023, Align reported its Q3 2023 earnings which fell short of
the previous guidance and analysts' expectations. Align officers
attributed this reduction to softness in the adult aligner market
to macroeconomic trends. Following this news, Align's stock price
fell by $74.78 per share, or approximately 28.2% to close at
$190.94 per share.
Due to the forgoing, The Gross Law Firm is investigating potential
securities fraud claims on behalf of certain Align investors. If
you incurred a loss on your ALGN investment, please contact us
using the link below to discuss your rights.
https://securitiesclasslaw.com/securities/align-loss-submission-form/?id=55943&from=3
WHY GROSS LAW FIRM? The Gross Law Firm is a nationally recognized
class action law firm, and our mission is to protect the rights of
all investors who have suffered as a result of deceit, fraud, and
illegal business practices. The Gross Law Firm is committed to
ensuring that companies adhere to responsible business practices
and engage in good corporate citizenship. The firm seeks recovery
on behalf of investors who incurred losses when false and/or
misleading statements or the omission of material information by a
company lead to artificial inflation of the company's stock.
Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar
outcomes.
CONTACT:
The Gross Law Firm
15 West 38th Street, 12th floor
New York, NY, 10018
Email: dg@securitiesclasslaw.com
Phone: (646) 453-8903 [GN]
ALLINA HEALTH: Gebhardt Consumer Suit Removed to D. Minn.
---------------------------------------------------------
The case styled CATHY GEBHARDT-LALLY and PATRICK WILL, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ALLINA HEALTH
SYSTEM D/B/A ALLINA HEALTH, ESSENTIA HEALTH, HEALTHPARTNERS D/B/A
PARK NICOLLET, and ST. FRANCIS REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, Case No.
24SL-CC03888, was removed from the Hennepin County District Court,
Fourth Judicial District, State of Minnesota, to the U.S. District
Court for the District of Minnesota on November 1, 2024.
The Clerk of Court for the District of Minnesota assigned Case No.
0:24-cv-04100 to the proceeding.
The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants implemented tracking
technologies into a website which collected and transmitted
patients' private information to Facebook, Google, Microsoft and
other third-parties.
Allina Health System, doing business as Allina Health, is a health
care company based in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Essentia Health is a health care company based in Minnesota.
HealthPartners, doing business as Park Nicollet, is a nonprofit
health organization in Bloomington, Minnesota.
St. Francis Regional Medical Center is a healthcare services
provider in Minnesota. [BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Nicole M. Moen, Esq.
Geoffrey Koslig, Esq.
Maliya G. Rattliffe, Esq.
FREDRIKSON & BYRON, P.A.
60 South Sixth Street, Ste. 1500
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone: (612) 492-7000
Facsimile: (612) 492-7077
Email: nmoen@fredlaw.com
gkoslig@fredlaw.com
mrattliffe@fredlaw.com
ALLSTATE INSURANCE: Thompson Sues Over Claims Adjusters' Unpaid OT
------------------------------------------------------------------
ROCKIE THOMPSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant, Case
No. 4:24-cv-04237 (S.D. Tex., November 1, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Mr. Thompson has worked for Allstate as a catastrophe claims
adjuster in Houston, Texas since approximately November 2023.
Allstate Insurance Company is an insurance company headquartered in
Northbrook, Illinois. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Taylor A. Jones, Esq.
HKM EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS LLP
1201 Fannin Street, Suite 202
Houston, TX 77002
Telephone: (832) 446-9403
Facsimile: (832) 356-2684
Email: tjones@hkm.com
AMAZON.COM SERVICES: Betts Sues Over Unpaid Wages
-------------------------------------------------
SHAWNICE BETTS and BOYSING SAMUEL, JR., Individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. AMAZON.COM SERVICES
LLC., f/k/a AMAZON SERVICES.COM, INC. Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-07563 (E.D.N.Y., October 29, 2024) seeks to recover unpaid
wages, unpaid overtime wages, and other actual damages as well as
liquidated damages and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs under
the New York Labor Law and various wage orders promulgated by the
New York State Department of Labor as well as the New York State
common law.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to pay Named
Plaintiffs and those similarly situated the wages owed to them for
the various periods of time they engaged, as required by Defendant,
in the pre-shift activity, mid-shift activity, and post-shift
activity, in violation of the NYLL.
While Defendant provided certain statements to the Named Plaintiffs
and those similarly situated with every payment of wages, those
statements did not comply with the requirements of the NYLL, says
the suit.
Named Plaintiffs Betts and Samuel were former employees of
Defendant who has worked at Amazon Warehouse JFK8 as associates
from August 2023 through February 2024 and from February 2021
through September 2022, respectively.
Amazon.com Services LLC provides e-commerce services. The Company
retails books, diamond jewelry, electronics, appliances, apparels,
and accessories.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Robert Wisniewski, Esq.
ROBERT WISNIEWSKI, P.C.
17 State Street - Suite 820
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 267-2101
E-mail: rw@rwapc.com
- and -
Leon Greenberg, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF LEON GREENBERG
1811 S. Rainbow Blvd., Suite 210
Las Vegas, NV 89145
Telephone: (702) 383-6085
E-mail: leongreenberg@overtimelaw.com
APPLE INC: Faces Labella Suit Over Defective AirPods
----------------------------------------------------
LINDSEY LABELLA; MICHAEL PAWSON; and STACEY RODGERS, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. APPLE
INC., Defendant, Case No. 5:24-cv-07588-NC (N.D. Cal., Nov. 1,
2024) alleges that the Defendant's AirPods Pro Gen 1 had an Audio
Defect.
According to the complaint, the Plaintiffs and similarly situated
Class Members bought defective AirPods Pro Gen 1 headphones at a
premium price when they, in fact, have "sound issues" that make the
headphones worth less than what they paid for them. As a result of
Apple's false and misleading advertising, and sale of its AirPods
Pro Gen 1 with an Audio Defect, Plaintiffs and the proposed Class
have suffered damages.
The Plaintiffs and similarly situated Class Members would not have
purchased their AirPods Pro Gen 1 or they would have paid less had
they known that Apple's advertising was false and misleading, and
that the AirPods Pro Gen 1 contained an Audio Defect.
Apple Inc. designs, manufactures, and markets smartphones, personal
computers, tablets, wearables and accessories, and sells a variety
of related accessories. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Annick M. Persinger, Esq.
Emily Feder Cooper, Esq.
TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP
1970 Broadway, Suite 1070
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: (510) 254-6808
Email: apersinger@tzlegal.com
ecooper@tzlegal.com
- and -
Andrea R. Gold, Esq.
Anna C. Haac, Esq.
TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP
2000 Pennsylvania Avenue, Northwest, Suite 1010
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 973-0900
Email: agold@tzlegal.com
ahaac@tzlegal.com
- and -
Patrick Brickman, Esq.
Frank Bartela, Esq.
DWORKEN & BERNSTEIN CO., L.P.A.
1468 W. 9th Street, Suite 135,
Cleveland, OH 44113
Telephone: (833) 856-0445
Email: pbrickman@dworkenlaw.com
fbartela@dworkenlaw.com
AS PAVERS LLC: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime, Lopez Says
-------------------------------------------------------
HUMBERTO LOPEZ, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. AS PAVERS LLC and ALEX HOLON, Defendant,
Case No. 2:24-cv-10175 (D.N.J., October 30, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendants for alleged violations of the Fair Labor
Standards Act and the New Jersey State Wage and Hour Law arising
from various willful and unlawful employment policies, patterns
and/or practices.
The Plaintiff is a former employee of the Defendants hired to work
paving streets for their business in New Jersey. From April 2024
until October 23, 2024, the Plaintiff was paid $25 per hour.
Although the Plaintiff worked approximately 60 hours per week,
thereby accruing approximately 20 hours of overtime per week, the
Plaintiff was not compensated for these overtime hours, says the
suit.
By reason of such willful violations Plaintiff asserts he is
entitled to recover from the Defendants (1) unpaid overtime wages,
(2) liquidated damages, (3) prejudgment, and post-judgment
interest; and/or (4) attorneys' fees and costs, pursuant to the
FLSA and NJWHL.
AS Pavers LLC provides hardscape & landscaping services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lina Stillman, Esq.
STILLMAN LEGAL, P.C.
42 Broadway, 12th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 203-2417
AXIOM ACQUISITION: Meza Suit Alleges Harassment, Retaliation
------------------------------------------------------------
MARILEYDI GONZALEZ MEZA, on behalf of herself and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. AXIOM ACQUISITION VENTURES
MANAGEMENT, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, FULL CIRCLE
FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, and
THE AXIOM GROUP HOLDINGS, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company,
Defendants, Case No. 8:24-cv-02523-CEH-LSG (M.D. Fla., October 29,
2024) arises from the Defendants' alleged unlawful conduct in
violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act and Title VII of the
Civil Rights Act.
On February 14, 2022, the Plaintiff began her employment with
Defendants as a negotiations specialist. Early on in her
employment, she was subjected to unwelcome sexual harassment by
Matt Dion. Mr. Dion would regularly invite Plaintiff out for dates,
exposed himself to Plaintiff on various occasions, discussed his
sexual fantasies with Plaintiff and tried to have sex with
Plaintiff, which Plaintiff declined. After Plaintiff rejected Mr.
Dion's sexual advances, Mr. Dion retaliated against the Plaintiff
by denying Plaintiff a salary increases and bonus, which Defendants
agreed to pay Plaintiff when she was hired, says the suit.
Axiom Acquisition Ventures Management is a debt purchasing company
licensed and authorized to and doing business in Hillsborough
County, Florida.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Wolfgang M. Florin, Esq.
Troy E. Longman, II, Esq.
16524 Pointe Village Drive, Suite 100
Lutz, FL 33558
Telephone (727) 254-5255
Facsimile (727) 483-7942
E-mail: wolfgang@floringray.com
tlongman@floringray.com
BATH & BODY: Torres Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
------------------------------------------------------
MARLENE TORRES, individually, and on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BATH & BODY WORKS, LLC, a
Delaware Limited Liability Company; and DOES 1 through 50,
inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 24STCV28530 (Cal. Super., Los
Angeles Cty., October 30, 2024) arises from the Defendants' alleged
unlawful labor practices in violation of the California Labor Code
and the California Business and Professions Code.
According to the complaint, the Defendants consistently maintained
and enforced against Plaintiff and other non-exempt employees
unlawful practices and policies in violation of California state
wage and hour laws, including failing to lawfully and accurately
pay Plaintiff and Class Members for all hours worked, including
minimum wages and overtime; failing to lawfully provide meal and
rest periods; failing to pay one hour of pay at the employee's
regular rate of pay when legally mandated meal or rest periods were
not lawfully provided; failing to accurately pay overtime; failing
to reimburse necessary expenses; failing to provide accurate
itemized wage statements; and failing to keep accurate records.
The Plaintiff and the members of the putative class were employed
by the Defendants as non-exempt employees, either directly or
indirectly, at retail stores in the State of California at any time
from four years prior to the filing of the complaint.
Bath & Body Works, LLC is an American retail store chain that sells
soaps, lotions, fragrances, and candles.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James R. Hawkins, Esq.
Christina M. Lucio, Esq.
Nicholas W. Schieffelin, Esq.
JAMES HAWKINS APLC
9880 Research Drive, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92618
Telephone: (949) 387-7200
Facsimile: (949) 387-6676
E-mail: james@Jameshawkinsaplc.com
christina@Jameshawkinsaplc.com
nick@Jameshawkinsaplc.com
BIO-LAB INC: Exposes Residents to Hazardous Chemicals, Reece Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
MADELYN REECE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BIO-LAB, INC. and KIK CUSTOM PRODUCTS INC.
d/b/a KIK CONSUMER PRODUCTS, INC., Defendants, Case No.
1:24-cv-05053-SEG (N.D. Ga., November 4, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendants for ultrahazardous activities, negligence,
gross negligence/willful and wanton conduct, nuisance, and
trespass.
The case arises from a fire that erupted at KIK BioLab's chemical
manufacturing facility in Conyers, Georgia on September 29, 2024,
which caused a chemical reaction that produced hazardous gas and a
large plume of smoke and chemicals. The uncontrolled chemical
reaction, fire, and damage to the facility caused hazardous
chemicals to stream into the air and throughout the surrounding
community. As a result of the Defendants' negligent, careless,
reckless and/or intentional conduct in connection with the fire
incident, the Plaintiff and similarly situated residents have
suffered and will continue to suffer harm to their properties and
person, resulting in damages, says the suit.
Bio-Lab, Inc. is the swimming pool and spa water care division of
KIK Consumer Products, Inc. based in Lawrenceville, Georgia.
KIK Custom Products, doing business as KIK Consumer Products, Inc.,
is a manufacturer of detergent and personal care products based in
Canada. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John C. Herman, Esq.
Candace N. Smith, Esq.
HERMAN JONES LLP
3424 Peachtree Road, N.E., Suite 1650
Atlanta, GA 30326
Telephone: (404) 504-6500
Facsimile: (404) 504-6501
Email: jherman@hermanjones.com
csmith@hermanjones.com
- and -
Peter A. Law, Esq.
Denise Hoying, Esq.
LAW & MORAN
563 Spring St. NW
Atlanta, GA 30308
Telephone: (404) 814-3700
Email: pete@lawmoran.com
denise@lawmoran.com
BIO-LAB INC: Facility Fire Affects Businesses, Pittman Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
PITTMAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BIO-LAB, INC. and KIK
CUSTOM PRODUCTS d/b/a KIK CONSUMER PRODUCTS, INC., Defendants, Case
No. 1:24-cv-05066-SEG (N.D. Ga., November 4, 2024) is a class
action against the Defendants for negligence, willful and wanton
conduct, nuisance, and trespass.
The case arises from a fire that erupted at KIK BioLab's chemical
manufacturing facility in Conyers, Georgia on September 29, 2024,
which caused a chemical reaction that produced hazardous gas and a
large plume of smoke and chemicals. The uncontrolled chemical
reaction, fire, and damage to the facility caused hazardous
chemicals to stream into the air and throughout the surrounding
areas. As a result of the Defendants' negligent, careless, reckless
and/or intentional conduct in connection with the fire incident,
the Plaintiff and similarly situated businesses have suffered
damages including, but not limited to, business interruptions,
property damage, lost profits, loss of use, and expected diminution
of property, says the suit.
Pittman Construction Company is a construction firm based in
Rockdale County, Georgia.
Bio-Lab, Inc. is the swimming pool and spa water care division of
KIK Consumer Products, Inc. based in Lawrenceville, Georgia.
KIK Custom Products, doing business as KIK Consumer Products, Inc.,
is a manufacturer of detergent and personal care products based in
Canada. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
MaryBeth V. Gibson, Esq.
GIBSON CONSUMER LAW GROUP, LLC
4279 Roswell Road, Suite 208-108
Atlanta, GA 30342
Telephone: (678) 642-2503
Email: marybeth@gibsonconsumerlawgroup.com
BIOLAB INC: Humphrey Files Suit Over Toxic Chemical Exposure
------------------------------------------------------------
NOEL HUMPHREY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BIOLAB, INC. and KIK CUSTOM PRODUCTS, INC.,
Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-04977-SEG (N.D. Ga., October 30, 2024)
is a class action filed by the plaintiff on behalf of himself and
other residents, property owners, employees, and businesses living,
working, or located in Georgia that were contaminated, and exposed
to, massive amounts of toxic chemicals during a chemical fire.
On September 29, 2024, a chemical fire broke out at BioLab's
chemical manufacturing facility in Conyers, Georgia. Around the
same time that the fire started, a building sprinkler activated.
Because the source of the ignition was water-reactive chemicals,
traditional firefighting methods were unsuccessful. Massive walls
of smoke and toxic chemicals spilled into Rockdale County, Georgia,
causing severe damage to the individuals and businesses in the
area, says the suit.
The Plaintiff lives approximately five miles from where the BioLab
Fire occurred. As a result of the BioLab Fire, the Plaintiff and
putative Class members suffered, among other things, physical
injury, medical expenses, loss of use and enjoyment of property,
property damage, exposure to toxic material, inconvenience,
disruption, and economic damages, the suit asserts.
Bio-Lab, Inc. develops, produces, and markets swimming pool and
spa maintenance products. The Company operates the chemical plant
located in Conyers, Georgia.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rodney E. Miller, Esq.
METHVIN, TERRELL, YANCEY, STEPHENS &
MILLER, P.C.
2201 Arlington Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 939-0199
Facsimile: (205) 939-0399
E-mail: rmiller@mtattorneys.com
BROWN INTEGRATED: Fails to Secure Employees' Info, Goins Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
JOSHUA GOINS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BROWN INTEGRATED LOGISTICS, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 1:24-cv-05038-JPB (N.D. Ga., November 1, 2024) is a class
action against the Defendant for negligence, negligence per se,
breach of implied contract, unjust enrichment, invasion of privacy,
and breach of fiduciary duty.
The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and
safeguard the personally identifiable information (PII) of the
Plaintiff and similarly situated current and former employees
stored within its network systems following a data breach between
November 13 and November 15, 2023. The Defendant also failed to
timely notify the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals
about the data breach. As a result, the private information of the
Plaintiff and Class members was compromised and damaged through
access by and disclosure to unknown and unauthorized third
parties.
Brown Integrated Logistics, Inc. is a logistics company
headquartered in Lithonia, Georgia. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph B. Alonso, Esq.
Daniel H. Wirth, Esq.
ALONSO & WIRTH
1708 Peachtree Street, NW, Suite 303
Atlanta, GA 30309
Telephone: (678) 928-4472
Email: jalonso@alonsowirth.com
dwirth@alonsowirth.com
- and -
Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
Raina Borrelli, Esq.
STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC
980 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610
Chicago, IL 60611
Telephone: (872) 263-1100
Facsimile: (872) 263-1109
Email: sam@straussborrelli.com
raina@straussborrelli.com
BYOMA US: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Miller Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
KIMBERLY MILLER, on behalf of herself and all other persons
similarly situated v. BYOMA US INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-01081
(W.D.N.Y., Nov. 6, 2024) alleges that the Defendant failed to
design, construct, maintain, and operate its interactive website,
https://byoma.com, to be fully accessible to and independently
usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired
persons, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
During Plaintiff's visits to the Website, the last occurring on
Oct. 16, 2024, in an attempt to purchase a Brightening Body Lotion
from the Defendant and to view the information on the Website, the
Plaintiff encountered multiple access barriers that denied the
Plaintiff a shopping experience similar to that of a sighted person
and full and equal access to the goods and services offered to the
public and made available to the public, the suit alleges.
The Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer frustration and
humiliation as a result of the discriminatory conditions present on
the Defendant's Website. These discriminatory conditions continue
to contribute to Plaintiff's sense of isolation and segregation,
the suit asserts.
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.
Ms. Miller is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using her
computer.
Byoma offers skincare products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
CAPGEMINI AMERICA: Fails to Properly Pay CSRs, Sidyan Suit Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------------
INDIA SIDYAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CAPGEMINI AMERICA, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-08351 (S.D.N.Y., November 1, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and for unjust
enrichment.
The Plaintiff has worked for the Defendant as a remote customer
service representative in Florida within the last two years.
Capgemini America, Inc. is an international information technology
services and consulting company, headquartered in New York, New
York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Charles R. Ash, IV, Esq.
ASH LAW, PLLC
402 W. Liberty St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48178
Telephone: (734) 234-5583
Email: cash@nationalwagelaw.com
- and -
Oscar A. Rodriguez, Esq.
HOOPER HATHAWAY, P.C.
126 S. Main St
Ann Arbor, MI 48104
Telephone: (734) 662-4426
Email: orod@hooperhathaway.com
CLAY-PLATTE FAMILY: Sued Over Unauthorized Personal Info Disclosure
-------------------------------------------------------------------
T.R., D.S., T.S., individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. CLAY-PLATTE FAMILY MEDICINE,
P.C., NATHAN D. GRANGER d/b/a SUMMIT FAMILY AND SPORTS MEDICINE,
COBBLESTONE FAMILY MEDICINE CLINIC d/b/a CLAY PLATTE FAMILY
MEDICINE CLINIC, P.C., and BARRY POINTE FAMILY CARE, LLC d/b/a
BARRY POINTE FAMILY CARE P.C., Case No. 4:24-cv-00704-SRB (W.D.
Mo., October 29, 2024) is a class action brought by Plaintiffs,
individually and on behalf of all citizens who are similarly
situated, seeking to redress Defendants' willful and reckless
violations of their privacy rights, actual damages, economic
damages and/or nominal damages, injunctive relief, and attorneys'
fees, litigation expenses, and costs.
This action pertains to Defendants' unauthorized disclosure of the
Plaintiffs' protected health information and personally
identifiable information that occurred on or around June 26, 2024.
As evidenced by the data breach's occurrence, the private
information contained in Defendants' network was not encrypted. The
Defendants disclosed Plaintiffs' and the other Class Members' PHI
and PII to unauthorized persons as a direct and/or proximate result
of Defendants' failure to safeguard and protect their PHI and PII,
says the suit.
The Plaintiffs and the other Class Members are patients of the
Clinics, each of which are Missouri healthcare providers, who
entrusted their private information to Defendants.
Clay-Platte Family Medicine, P.C. is a healthcare provider and
family medicine clinic based in Missouri.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Maureen M. Brady, Esq.
Lucy McShane, Esq.
MCSHANE & BRADY, LLC
4006 Central Street
Kansas City, MO 64111
Telephone: (816) 888-8010
Facsimile: (816) 332-6295
E-mail: mbrady@mcshanebradylaw.com
lmcshane@mcshanebradylaw.com
COURSEHORSE INC: Espinal Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
-------------------------------------------------------------
FRANGIE ESPINAL, on behalf of herself and all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. COURSEHORSE, INC., Defendant, Case
No. 1:24-cv-08235 (S.D.N.Y., October 29, 2024) is a civil rights
action against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate its interactive website,
https://coursehorse.com/nyc, to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New
York City Human Rights Law.
During Plaintiff's visits to the website, the last occurring on
June 24, 2024, in an attempt to book a Cake Decorating 101 Class
from Defendant and to view the information on the Website, she
encountered multiple access barriers that denied her a shopping
experience similar to that of a sighted person and full and equal
access to the goods and services offered to the public and made
available to the public. She was unable to locate pricing and was
not able to add the item to the cart due to broken links, pictures
without alternate attributes and other barriers on Defendant's
website, which prevented her from doing so, says the suit.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
its website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers.
CourseHorse, Inc. operates the CourseHorse online interactive
website and course network across the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
DOLE FOOD: Aguilar Sues Over Mislabeled Dole Whip Products
----------------------------------------------------------
JULIAN AGUILAR, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DOLE FOOD COMPANY, INC., Defendant, Case No.
5:24-cv-02305 (C.D. Cal., October 30, 2024) is a consumer class
action for Defendant's violations of the California Consumers Legal
Remedies Act, the California Unfair Competition Law, and breach of
express warranties.
The Defendant manufactures, distributes, advertises, and sells Dole
Whip products. The packaging prominently displays on the front of
the label that these Products contain "No Artificial Ingredients."
However, contrary to the label, each of the products are made with
"citric acid" -- an artificial preservative used in food products,
says the suit.
The Defendant's packaging, labeling, and advertising scheme is
intended to give consumers the reasonable belief that they are
buying a premium product that is free from artificial ingredients.
Like other reasonable consumers, the Plaintiff was deceived by
Defendant's unlawful conduct and brings this action individually
and on behalf of consumers to remedy Defendant's unlawful acts, the
suit contends.
Dole Food Company, Inc. produces, markets, and distributes fresh
fruits and vegetables.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Craig W. Straub, Esq.
Michael T. Houchin, Esq.
Kurt D. Kessler, Esq.
CROSNER LEGAL, P.C.
9440 Santa Monica Blvd. Suite 301
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
Telephone: (866) 276-7637
E-mail: craig@crosnerlegal.com
mhouchin@crosnerlegal.com
kurt@crosnerlegal.com
DP HOSPITALITY: Abramson Balks at Blind-Inaccessible Website
------------------------------------------------------------
PAUL ABRAMSON, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Dp Hospitality Group, LLC, Defendant, Case
No. 1:24-cv-07545 (E.D.N.Y., October 29, 2024) is a civil rights
action against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate their website,
https://www.brooklynchophouse.com, to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New
York City Human Rights Law.
On August 23, 2024, the Plaintiff was searching for a popular
steakhouse in NYC when an online search led him to the Defendant's
website. While trying to review the offerings on the site, he
accessed the "Order Online" category. However, he encountered
several accessibility issues, including unexpected changes in
content, such as external links and new window links that opened
without advance warning, ambiguous labels for interactive elements,
and inadequate labeling for form fields.
These access barriers have caused Brooklynchophouse.com to be
inaccessible to, and not independently usable by blind and
visually-impaired persons. Amongst other access barriers
experienced, the Plaintiff was unable to learn more information
about restaurant locations and hours of operation, compare prices
and benefits and learn more information about the goods and
services in its physical location, says the suit.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Dp
Hospitality Group's policies, practices, and procedures so that its
website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory
damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to
unlawful discrimination.
Dp Hospitality Group, LLC operates the website that offers dining
services with a focus on combining steakhouse classics and Asian
cuisine, along with private event hosting, rooftop bar access,
pick-up and delivery options.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gabriel A. Levy, Esq.
GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C.
1129 Northern Blvd, Suite 404
Manhasset, NY 11030
Telephone: (347) 941-4715
E-mail: Glevyfirm@gmail.com
ELON MUSK: Faces McAferty Fraud Suit Over Breach of Contract
------------------------------------------------------------
JACQUELINE MCAFERTY, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. ELON MUSK & AMERICA PAC, Case No.
1:24-cv-01346 (W.D. Tex., Nov. 5, 2024) suit contends that the
Defendants defrauded the Plaintiff and the Class Members by seeking
their political support, as well as personal identifying
information -- both of which were valuable consideration provided
by Plaintiff and the Class Members, in exchange for a chance to
receive $1,000,000 which was never an actual chance.
On October 7, America PAC launched a "Petition in Favor of Free
Speech and the Right to Bear Arms," with an offer to pay
individuals $47 for each registered voter referred who signed the
petition. That petition stated it was "exclusively open to
registered voters in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Nevada, Arizona,
Michigan, Wisconsin and North Carolina" and "[e]xpires November 5."
At an Oct. 19, 2024 rally, on Musk's X platform, and on America
PAC's website, Defendants announced that if a registered voter
turned over their personal identifying information (i.e., address,
cell phone number and e-mail address) and made a political pledge
by signing a petition pledging support for "the Constitution,
especially freedom of speech and the right to bear arms," they
would be eligible to be selected "randomly" to win $1 million.
Since launching on Oct. 19, 2024, America PAC claims it awarded
$1,000,000 checks to nine individuals through its random selections
of winners. It made those awards on October 19, 20, 21, 22, 24, 25,
26, and 27, 2024. No winner was announced on October 23.
In court on Monday, Nov. 4, 2024, Musk told a judge in Philadelphia
that "so-called 'winners' of his $1 million-a-day voter sweepstakes
in swing states are not chosen by chance but are instead chosen to
be paid 'spokespeople' for the group."
Therefore, the Defendants' statements indicating that individuals
who signed the petition would be chosen at random to win $1,000,000
were false, and Defendants knew those statements were false at the
time they were made. The Defendants made the false statements with
the intention of inducing individuals to sign the America PAC
petition.
The Plaintiff sues the Defendants for fraud, breach of contract,
and for injunctive relief. She seeks to certify a class of
similarly situated persons under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
23(b)(1), (b)(2), and (b)(3).
The Plaintiff signed the America PAC petition on Oct. 20, 2024.
Musk founded and funded America PAC.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Josh Sanford, Esq.
SANFORD LAW FIRM PLLC
10800 Financial Centre Pkwy, Ste 510
Little Rock, AR 72211
Telephone: (501) 221-0088
Facsimile: (888) 787-2040
E-mail: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com
- and -
Jarrett L. Ellzey, Esq.
Leigh S. Montgomery, Esq.
Alexander G. Kykta, Esq.
EKSM, LLP
1105 Milford Street
Houston, TX 77006
Telephone: (888) 350-3931
Facsimile: (888) 276-3455
E-mail: jellzey@eksm.com
lmontgomery@eksm.com
akykta@eksm.com
EMCORE CORP: M&A Probes Proposed Merger With Velocity One
---------------------------------------------------------
Monteverde & Associates PC (the "M&A Class Action Firm"),
headquartered at the Empire State Building in New York City, is
investigating EMCORE Corporation (NASDAQ: EMKR), relating to its
proposed merger with Velocity One Holdings, LP. Under the terms of
the agreement, EMCORE stockholders will receive $3.10 per share of
EMCORE common stock they own.
Click link for more information
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/emcore-corporation-emkr/. It is free
and there is no cost or obligation to you.
NOT ALL LAW FIRMS ARE THE SAME. Before you hire a law firm, you
should talk to a lawyer and ask:
1. Do you file class actions and go to Court?
2. When was the last time you recovered money for
shareholders?
3. What cases did you recover money in and how much?
About Monteverde & Associates PC
Our firm litigates and has recovered money for shareholders . . .
and we do it from our offices in the Empire State Building. We are
a national class action securities firm with a successful track
record in trial and appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme
Court.
No company, director or officer is above the law. If you own common
stock in the above listed company and have concerns or wish to
obtain additional information free of charge, please visit our
website or contact Juan Monteverde, Esq. either via e-mail at
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com or by telephone at (212) 971-1341.
Contact:
Juan Monteverde, Esq.
MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC
The Empire State Building
350 Fifth Ave. Suite 4740
New York, NY 10118
United States of America
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com
Tel: (212) 971-1341
Attorney Advertising.(C) 2024 Monteverde & Associates PC. The law
firm responsible for this advertisement is Monteverde & Associates
PC (www.monteverdelaw.com). Prior results do not guarantee a
similar outcome with respect to any future matter. [GN]
FANTASY COOKIE: Aguilar Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
----------------------------------------------------------
GINA ELBA MORALES AGUILAR, individually, and on behalf of other
aggrieved employees pursuant to the California Private Attorneys
General Act, Plaintiff v. FANTASY COOKIE CORPORATION, a Delaware
Corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No.
24STCV28338 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., October 29, 2024)
arises from the Defendants' alleged unlawful labor practices in
violation of the California Labor Code.
The complaint alleges that Defendants engaged in violations of the
rights of Plaintiff and other aggrieved employees through its: a)
failure to pay overtime; b) failure to provide meal periods; c)
failure to provide rest periods; d) failure to pay minimum wages;
failure to timely pay wages upon termination; e) failure to timely
pay wages during employment; f) failure to provide complete and
accurate wage statements; g) failure to keep complete and accurate
payroll records; and h) failure to reimburse necessary
business-related expenses and costs.
The Plaintiff was employed by Fantasy Cookie to work at the
Defendants' warehouses from April 2013 until the date of
termination on August 29, 2023.
Fantasy Cookie Corp. is a contract manufacturer in the food
industry.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Alan I. Schimmel, Esq.
Michael W. Parks, Esq.
Arya Rhodes, Esq.
Ashtyne Cofer, Esq.
SCHIMMEL & PARKS, APLC
15303 Ventura Blvd., Suite 650
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
Telephone: (818) 464-5061
Facsimile: (818) 464-5091
FIRSTSOURCE SOLUTIONS: Barry Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Kentucky
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Firstsource Solutions
USA, LLC. The case is styled as Cynthia R. Barry, on behalf of
herself and others similarly situated v. Firstsource Solutions USA,
LLC, Case No. 3:24-cv-00648-GNS (W.D. Ky., Nov. 8, 2024).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.
Firstsource -- https://www.firstsource.com/ -- is a leader in
business process management (BPM) services and a trusted
outsourcing partner to the world's leading brands.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael L. Greenwald, Esq.
GREENWALD DAVIDSON RADBIL PLLC
5550 Glades Road, Ste. 500
Boca Raton, FL 33431
Phone: (561) 826-5477
Email: mgreenwald@gdrlawfirm.com
- and -
Shireen Hormozdi Bowman, Esq.
HORMOZDI LAW FIRM, LLC
1770 Indian Trail Lilburn Rd., Suite 175
Norcross, GA 30093
Phone: (678) 395-7795
Fax: (866) 929-2434
Email: shireen@norcrosslawfirm.com
FLUX POWER: Artificially Inflated Stock Prices, Kassam Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
ASFA KASSAM, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. FLUX POWER HOLDINGS, INC., RONALD F. DUTT,
and CHARLES A. SCHEIWE, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-02051 (D.
Nev., November 1, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants
for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.
According to the complaint, the Defendants made materially false
and misleading statements regarding Flux Power's business,
operations, and prospects in order to trade Flux Power securities
at artificially inflated prices between November 11, 2022, and
September 30, 2024. Specifically, the Defendants made false and/or
misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Flux
Power's financial statements from November 10, 2022 to the present
included, among other things, overstated inventory, gross profit
current assets, and total assets; (2) Flux understated cost of
sales, net loss; (3) as a result, Flux Power would need to restate
its previously filed financial statements from November 10, 2022 to
the present; (4) Flux Power understated internal control weaknesses
or stated that it had adequate internal controls when in fact it
did not; and (5) as a result, the Defendants' statements about its
business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and
misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all times, says the
suit.
When the truth emerged, the price of Flux Power common stock fell
by $0.18 per share, or 5.9 percent, to close at $2.86 on October 1,
2024.
As a result of the Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, which
caused the precipitous decline in the market value of the company's
common shares, the Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered
significant economic losses and damages.
Flux Power Holdings, Inc. is a manufacturer of advanced lithium-ion
energy storage solutions, with its principal executive offices
located in Vista, California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Patrick. R. Leverty, Esq.
William R. Ginn, Esq.
LEVERTY & ASSOCIATES LAW, CHTD.
832 Willow Street
Reno, NV 89502
Telephone: (775) 322-6636
Email: pat@levertylaw.com
bill@levertylaw.com
- and -
Laurence M. Rosen, Esq.
Phillip Kim, Esq.
THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (212) 686-1060
Facsimile: (212) 202-3827
Email: philkim@rosenlegal.com
lrosen@rosenlegal.com
FRANKLIN RESOURCES: Rosen Law Probes Potential Securities Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Why: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, continues
to investigate potential securities claims on behalf of
shareholders of Franklin Resources, Inc. (NYSE: BEN) resulting from
allegations that Franklin Resources may have issued materially
misleading business information to the investing public.
So What: If you purchased Franklin Resources securities you may be
entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees
or costs through a contingency fee arrangement. The Rosen Law Firm
is preparing a class action seeking recovery of investor losses.
What to do next: To join the prospective class action, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=29671 call Phillip Kim,
Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com for
information on the class action.
What is this about: On August 21, 2024, Franklin Resources filed a
current report with the SEC. In this current report, the company
announced it was naming a sole Chief Investment Officer at Western
Asset Management (a company subsidiary) to replace co-Chief
Investment Officer Ken Leech, who had been on a leave of absence,
effective immediately. The current report also stated Ken Leech had
"received a Wells Notice from the Staff of the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission," and "[i]n light of Mr. Leech's leave of
absence, the Company has determined that closing its Macro
Opportunities strategy [. . .] is in clients' best interests."
On this news, Franklin Resources' stock fell 12.5% on August 21,
2024.
Why Rosen Law: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel
with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms
issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or
any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not
actually litigate securities class actions. Be wise in selecting
counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the
globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the
largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese
Company at the time. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS
Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class
action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4
each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of
dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438
million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was
named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's
attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.
Contact Information:
Laurence Rosen, Esq.
Phillip Kim, Esq.
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Tel: (212) 686-1060
Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
Fax: (212) 202-3827
case@rosenlegal.com
www.rosenlegal.com [GN]
FUJIYA LLC: Fonseca Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages for Restaurant Staff
----------------------------------------------------------------
LLOMLY FONSECA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. FUJIYA, LLC, D/B/A FUJIYA JAPANESE
RESTAURANT, and DAVID K. FIGUEREDO, individually, Defendants, Case
No. 1:24-cv-24308 (S.D. Fla., November 3, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime and minimum
wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants as a non-exempt, full-time
restaurant employee from approximately June 15, 2024, to August 21,
2024.
Fujiya, LLC, doing business as Fujiya Japanese Restaurant, is a
restaurant owner and operator located in Miami, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
ZANDRO E. PALMA, PA.
9100 S. Dadeland Blvd., Suite 1500
Miami, FL 33156
Telephone: (305) 446-1500
Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
Email: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com
GAMETIME UNITED: Espinal Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FRANGIE ESPINAL, on behalf of herself and all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GAMETIME UNITED INC., Defendant,
Case No. 1:24-cv-08236 (S.D.N.Y., October 29, 2024) is a civil
rights action against the Defendant for its failure to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its interactive website,
https://gametime.co, to be fully accessible to and independently
usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons in
violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York
State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law.
During Plaintiff's visits to the website, the last occurring on
June 24, 2024, in an attempt to purchase a Mets vs Yankee Citi
Field Ticket from Defendant and to view the information on the
Website, she encountered multiple access barriers that denied her a
shopping experience similar to that of a sighted person and full
and equal access to the goods and services offered to the public
and made available to the public. She was unable to locate pricing
and was not able to add the item to the cart due to broken links,
pictures without alternate attributes and other barriers on
Defendant's website, which prevented her from doing so. The access
barriers Plaintiff encountered have caused a denial of her full and
equal access in the past, and now deter her on a regular basis from
accessing the website, says the suit.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
its website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers.
Gametime United Inc. is a company specializing in last-minute
ticket sales for sports, music, and theater events.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
GMZEP CONSULTING: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Mora Claims
--------------------------------------------------------
DAVID MORA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GMZEP CONSULTING GROUP LLC; and RODRIGO
GOMEZ, Defendants, Case No. 0:24-cv-62067-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Nov. 3,
2024) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and
overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys'
fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Plaintiff Mora was employed by the Defendants as a construction
employee.
GMZEP Consulting Group LLC is a construction and remodeling
company. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
ZANDRO E. PALMA, PA.
9100 S. Dadeland Blvd. Suite 1500
Miami, FL 33156
Telephone: (305) 446-1500
Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
Email: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com
GOODRX INC: Keaveny Drug Balks at Illegal Price-Fixing Scheme
-------------------------------------------------------------
KEAVENY DRUG, INC., individually and on behalf of a class of those
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GOODRX, INC.; GOODRX HOLDINGS,
INC.; CVS CAREMARK CORP.; EXPRESS SCRIPTS, INC.; MEDIMPACT
HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS, INC.; and NAVITUS HEALTH SOLUTIONS, LLC,
Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-09379 (C.D. Cal., October 30, 2024) is
an antitrust class action under the Sherman Act to put a stop to
Defendants' illegal price-fixing scheme, which targets independent
pharmacies like Plaintiff.
According to the complaint, the Defendants and four leading
pharmacy benefit managers, or PBMs, are ostensibly competitors for
pharmacy reimbursements when patients fill prescriptions for
generic medications. But rather than compete, GoodRx and the PBM
Defendants agreed to artificially suppress prescription drug
reimbursement rates paid to independent pharmacies, and to increase
fees charged to pharmacies, on all GoodRx-related transactions.
This conspiracy has caused harm to independent pharmacies
throughout the United States, the suit says.
As a result of this Integrated Savings Program scheme, the
Defendants artificially suppress the rate at which they reimburse
pharmacies, and they increase the fees pharmacies must pay. They
have implemented this conspiracy by sharing their own, and
accessing their competitors', reimbursement information, using
real-time, non-public, confidential, and proprietary generic-drug
pricing information through an algorithm, alleges the suit.
Plaintiff Keaveny Drug is a generationally owned and operated
pharmacy that has served Minnesota communities.
GoodRx, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of GoodRx Intermediate
Holdings, LLC, which in turn is a wholly owned subsidiary of GoodRx
Holdings, Inc. GoodRx processes 2.5% of all prescription drug
claims in the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel L. Warshaw, Esq.
Bobby Pouya, Esq.
Naveed Abaie, Esq.
PEARSON WARSHAW, LLP
15165 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 400
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
Telephone: (818) 788-8300
Facsimile: (818) 788-8104
E-mail: dwarshaw@pwfirm.com
bpouya@pwfirm.com
- and -
Heidi M. Silton, Esq.
David W. Asp, Esq.
Joseph C. Bourne, Esq.
LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP
100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 2200
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Telephone: (612) 339-6900
Facsimile: (612) 339-0981
E-mail: hmsilton@locklaw.com
dwasp@locklaw.com
jcbourne@locklaw.com
GRATEFUL HEARTS: Underpays Home Health Employees, Seals Suit Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DEREK SEALS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GRATEFUL HEARTS LLC, Defendant, Case No.
2:24-cv-05891 (E.D. Pa., November 1, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Pennsylvania
Minimum Wage Act.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant as a home health employee
during a three-year period.
Grateful Hearts LLC is a provider of home health services in
Pennsylvania. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Peter Winebrake, Esq.
Michelle Tolodziecki, Esq.
WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC
715 Twining Road, Suite 211
Dresher, PA 19025
Telephone: (215) 884-2491
Email: pwinebrake@winebrakelaw.com
mtolodziecki@winebrakelaw.com
GREENFIELD PARK: Settles Sex Abuse Class Action of Deceased Coach
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jesse Feith of Montreal Gazette reports that a settlement agreement
has been reached in a class-action lawsuit against a deceased
Greenfield Park hockey coach accused of sexually abusing youths
under his watch for decades.
Launched four years ago, the suit sought compensation for anyone
abused by François Lamarre and argued the city, which merged into
Longueuil in 2002, failed to protect the children in its hockey
program.
Under the settlement agreement, a total of up to $10.25 million
could now be paid out to alleged victims. The agreement still needs
to be approved by the courts, with a hearing scheduled for early
December.
"Now is the time for (Lamarre's) victims to get justice, closure
and vindication," John Cormier, the lead plaintiff in the case,
said on Friday, November 8. "The hard work has been done; the path
has been established."
Lamarre, who was also a Montreal police officer, coached in the
South Shore community from the 1970s to the early 2000s.
He was arrested in December 2019 and pleaded not guilty to nine
charges -- spanning from 1972 to 1997 -- that included
sexual assault, gross indecency, molestation and sexually touching
a minor.
He died the following summer before the criminal case could make it
to trial. At the time, the Quebec Crown prosecutor's office had
authorized additional charges tied to a dozen more alleged
victims.
The class-action lawsuit was authorized in the spring of 2021,
targeting the City of Longueuil as well as Lamarre's estate.
It alleged Lamarre used the same modus operandi over decades: He
would meet children through his position as a hockey coach, then
initiate "play fighting" that would escalate into sexual abuse or
assault.
The settlement agreement covers any abuse committed by Lamarre
while he acted as a coach for Greenfield Park's municipal hockey
program up until the end of 2001.
Individual compensation will be established based on the severity
of abuse and consequences. The maximum amount one person could
receive has been set at $600,000.
Depending on the number of claims, the agreement calls for between
$3.6 million and $10.25 million to be paid out to victims.
The City of Longueuil will pay the vast majority of the
compensation, with the exception of roughly $8,000 covered by
Revenu Québec, which took over Lamarre's estate after his family
renounced it.
The city did not respond to a request for comment on Friday,
November 8.
Before the settlement was reached, the class-action trial was
scheduled to begin this fall. It was supposed to hear from more
than 50 witnesses, including 11 alleged victims.
Lawyer David Stolow, of the Kugler Kandestin law firm behind the
suit, said the agreement not only brings those people a sense of
justice, but also spares them the need to testify at trial.
"From our perspective, it's an outstanding settlement," Stolow
said.
He stressed that under the agreement, people wishing to come
forward as claimants can now do so without their identities being
made public or known by the city's lawyers.
In Cormier's case, the abuse started when he was only 10 years
old.
He says it included incidents at the hockey arena, in the referee's
locker room, in Lamarre's car and elsewhere. It threw his life off
track as a child, and he has wrestled with the consequences ever
since.
Cormier encouraged others to come forward as claimants if they're
ready, noting he understands many are still struggling to come to
terms with what happened.
"I know how hard it is, believe me," Cormier said. "But it can
bring closure, and hopefully a little vindication -- what you
experienced was true, and no one helped. You were a child and you
should have been protected." [GN]
HALEON US: Mislabels Dental Care Products, Cross Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------
JOSHUA CROSS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HALEON US INC., Defendant, Case No.
2:24-cv-09325-MCS-PVC (C.D. Cal., October 29, 2024) is a class
action against the Defendant for express warranty, breach of
implied warranty of merchantability, unjust enrichment and for
violations of the California's Business & Professions Code and the
Consumer Legal Remedies Act.
Haleon manufactures, markets, and sells the Parodontax line of
dental care products, including four variants of Parodontax's
"ACTIVE GUM REPAIR" products (Active Gum Repair Toothpaste: Breath
Freshener; Active Gum Repair Toothpaste: Fresh Mint; Active Gum
Repair Toothpaste: Whitening; and Active Gum Repair Mouthwash:
Clear Mint). The Defendant prominently markets and advertises
Parodontax, claiming it can "Repair" gums. Reasonable consumers,
including Plaintiff, understand this to mean that Parodontax is
capable of repairing lost or damaged gums, says the suit.
However, the Defendant's gum "repair" language used to advertise
Parodontax is a misleading gimmick. The products have the same
active ingredient as many other anticavity toothpastes. Despite
that fact, Haleon advertises Parodontax as being specially
formulated to "Repair" gums, distinguishing Parodontax from other
fluoride toothpastes that merely claim they prevent cavities and
decay, the suit alleges.
Haleon US Inc. manufactures, labels, markets, and distributes, the
Parodontax brand of oral care products throughout the United
States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Justin B. Farar, Esq.
KAPLAN FOX & KILSHEIMER LLP
12400 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 460
Los Angeles, CA 90025
Telephone: (310) 614-7260
Facsimile: (310) 614-7260
E-mail: jfarar@kaplanfox.com
- and -
Laurence D. King, Esq.
Matthew B. George, Esq.
Blair E. Reed, Esq.
Clarissa R. Olivares, Esq.
KAPLAN FOX & KILSHEIMER LLP
1999 Harrison Street, Suite 1560
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: (415) 772-4700
Facsimile: (415) 772-4707
E-mail: lking@kaplanfox.com
mgeorge@kaplanfox.com
breed@kaplanfox.com
colivares@kaplanfox.com
HERSHEY CO: Chocolate Product Contains PFAS, Santos Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
RAUL SANTOS, II, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. THE HERSHEY COMPANY, Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-24375-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Nov. 7, 2024) alleges that the
Defendant's chocolate and confectionery products ("Confectionery
Products") contain heightened levels of dangerous, unsafe organic
fluorine and/or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS").
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant
negligently misrepresented or omitted facts regarding the quality,
nature, and characteristics of its Confectionery Products. This
includes statements in the product labeling and packaging, as
referenced therein, that described the product as safe without
disclosing the presence or levels of PFAS or fluorine.
The Defendant's action had the effect of fraudulently inducing
customers to pay in whole or in part for Defendant's Confectionery
Products – products which it knew or should have known did not
comply with the applicable standards and contained undisclosed
impurities, says the suit.
The Plaintiff and each other class member would not have purchased
the Confectionery Products had they known these drugs contained
undisclosed impurities, or that the products did not have the
represented safety profile.
The Hershey Company manufactures chocolate and sugar confectionery
products. The Company's principal products includes chocolate and
sugar confectionery products, gum and mint refreshment products,
and pantry items, such as baking ingredients, toppings, and
beverages. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
George Williamson, Esq.
FARR LAW FIRM P.A.
99 Nesbit Street
Punta Gorda, FL 33950
Telephone: (941) 639-1158
Email: gwilliamson@farr.com
- and -
Allan Kanner, Esq.
Conlee S. Whiteley, Esq.
David J. Stanoch, Esq.
KANNER & WHITELEY, L.L.C.
701 Camp Street
New Orleans, LA 70130
Telephone: (504) 524-5777
Email: a.kanner@kanner-law.com
c.whiteley@kanner-law.com
d.stanoch@kanner-law.com
- and -
Andrew Bizer, Esq.
BIZER & DEREUS
3319 St. Claude Avenue
New Orleans, LA 70117
Telephone: (504) 619-9999
Email: andrew@bizerlaw.com
HISENSE USA: Deyell Sues Over Defective Smart TV Products
---------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Deyell, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. HISENSE USA CORP., Case No. 1:24-cv-04363-AT (N.D. Ga.,
Sept. 26, 2024, is brought as a common law warranty claims and
claims under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act against Defendant
arising from the sale of thousands of year 2019 – present Hisense
4K Android Smart TVs, including Android TV/Google TV variants of
the H8, F and G series, H9, F and G series, H65, U6, including the
U6H and U6K models, U8, including the U8N, and the A6 series
(collectively, the "Class Smart TVs") throughout New York and the
United States that were manufactured by Defendant Hisense with a
defective main board, causing the Class Smart TVs to suffer
performance issues, such as lagging, sluggishness, and continuous
crashing of the software (the "Main Board defect" or "the
Defect").
The Plaintiff's and Class Members' Class Smart TVs became sluggish
a few months after purchase. For some, these performance issues
were exacerbated following firmware updates received from Hisense
on or after July 2020, when the television's operating system was
updated, such as from Android 8 to Android 9. These performance
issues include slow or unresponsive inputs, inability to download
or launch apps, reset to factory settings, or turn on the TV.
Hisense sold and continues to sell the Class Smart TVs despite its
awareness of the Defect. Hisense chose and continues to choose
financial gain at the expense of consumers by concealing and
omitting a disclosure of this critical main board component failure
to consumers who purchase the Class Smart TVs.
Despite its knowledge, Hisense has failed to issue a recall of the
inherently defective main boards or reimburse Class Smart TV owners
for the inevitable failure of this critical part. Instead, Hisense
denies there is a problem or ignores customer queries from affected
customers.
Because the Defect can manifest shortly outside of the warranty
period for the Class Smart TVs—and given Hisense's knowledge of
this concealed, safety related defect—Hisense's attempt to limit
the warranty as detailed herein with respect to the Main Board
defect is unconscionable and unenforceable.
The Plaintiff and Class Members have suffered harm because of
Hisense's decision not to disclose the Defect by overpaying for
their Class Smart TVs and by paying significant sums for Hisense to
attempt, and fail, to properly diagnose and repair their Class
Smart TVs that exhibit the Main Board defect. Plaintiff and Class
Members have also expended time in attempting to have the Main
Board defect repaired, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff purchased a new Hisense H8G Series 4K Android Smart
TV from PC Richards & Son
The Defendant designs, manufactures and sells televisions
throughout the United States, including in the State of New York,
under the Hisense brand name.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kyle G.A. Wallace, Esq.
SHIVER HAMILTON CAMPBELL, LLC
3490 Piedmont Road, Suite 640
Atlanta, Georgia 30305
Phone: (404) 593-0020
Facsimile: (888) 501-9536
Email: kwallace@shiverhamilton.com
- and -
Nicholas A. Migliaccio, Esq.
Jason Rathod, Esq.
MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD, LLP
412 H Street NE
Washington, D.C. 20002
Phone: 202.470.3520
Email: nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com
jrathod@classlawdc.com
HOLMAN AUTOMOTIVE: Vyas Sues Over Work Discrimination & Retaliation
-------------------------------------------------------------------
ASHOK VYAS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HOLMAN AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, INC. and HOLMAN
AUTOMOTIVE, INC., together doing business as BMW OF PEMBROKE PINES,
and MELINDA K. "MINDY" HOLMAN, individually and as Chairman and
Director of HOLMAN AUTOMOTIVE GROUP, INC. and HOLMAN AUTOMOTIVE,
INC., Defendants, Case No. 0:24-cv-62086 (S.D. Fla., November 4,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of
the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, Title VII of the
U.S. Civil Rights Act of 1964, and the Florida Civil Rights Act.
The case arises from the Defendants' alleged unlawful and
discriminatory practices against employees, including the
Plaintiff, based on age, gender, and national origin. The Plaintiff
asks the Court to remedy intentional discrimination and retaliation
by the Defendants.
Mr. Vyas was employed by the Defendants at their BMW dealership at
14800 Sheridan Street, Pembroke Pines Florida from on or about
October 17, 2015, through his termination on or about June 16,
2022.
Holman Automotive Group, Inc. is an automobile dealer in New
Jersey.
Holman Automotive, Inc., doing business as BMW of Pembroke Pines,
is an automobile dealer in New Jersey. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Donald R. McCoy, Esq.
DONALD R. McCOY, P. A.
111 S.E. 12th Street
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316
Telephone: (954) 618-6575
Facsimile: (954) 618-6577
Email: mccoyesquire@me.com
HONDA DEVELOPMENT: Faces Hill Suit Over Unpaid Overtime
-------------------------------------------------------
VERONICA HILL, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. HONDA DEVELOPMENT & MANUFACTURING OF AMERICA, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 2:24-cv-04118-SDM-CMV (S.D. Ohio, October 30,
2024) is a class action against the Defendant for its failure to
pay employees overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
Named Plaintiff worked as an hourly, non-exempt employee of
Defendant, in the position of production line associate at its
Marysville, Ohio facility from approximately June 2021 to April
2022. She asserts that the Defendant suffered or permitted her and
similarly situated employees to work more than 40 hours per
workweek while not paying them overtime premium for all such hours
worked.
Honda Development & Manufacturing of America, LLC is a car
manufacturer primarily engaged in the production of personal and
commercial automotive vehicles.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew J.P. Coffman, Esq.
Adam C. Gedling, Esq.
Kelsie N. Hendren, Esq.
Tristan T. Akers, Esq.
COFFMAN LEGAL, LLC
1550 Old Henderson Rd Suite #126
Columbus, OH 43220
Telephone: (614) 949-1181
Facsimile: (614) 386-9964
E-mail: mcoffman@mcoffmanlegal.com
agedling@mcoffmanlegal.com
khendren@mcoffmanlegal.com
takers@mcoffmanlegal.com
HOUSE OF MACADAMIAS: Young Seeks Equal Website Access for Blind
---------------------------------------------------------------
LESHAWN YOUNG, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HOUSE OF MACADAMIAS LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-08497 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 7, 2024) alleges violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web
site, https://houseofmacadamias.com, is not fully or equally
accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the
Plaintiff, in violation of 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 Web site will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.
House of Macadamias LLC is an e-commerce platform that sells food
products made from macadamia. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Tel: (212) 228-9795
Fax: (212) 982-6284
Email: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
HYATT CORPORATION: Sadik Files Suit in S.D. California
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Hyatt Corporation, et
al. The case is styled as Austin Sadik, on behalf of himself and
all similarly situated persons, and the general public v. Hyatt
Corporation, Does 1 through 25, inclusive, Case No.
3:24-cv-02060-AJB-JLB (S.D. Cal., Nov. 1, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Labor for Labor Litigation.
Hyatt Hotels Corporation -- http://www.hyatt.com/-- commonly known
as Hyatt Hotels & Resorts, is an American multinational hospitality
company headquartered in the Riverside Plaza area of Chicago that
manages and franchises luxury and business hotels, resorts, and
vacation properties.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Reuben D. Nathan, Esq.
NATHAN & ASSOCIATES, APC
2901 West Coast Highway, Suite 200
Newport Beach, CA 92663
Phone: (949) 270-2798
Email: rnathan@nathanlawpractice.com
HYDRO EXTRUSION: Creasey Files Suit in Pa. Ct. of Common Pleas
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Hydro Extrusion USA,
LLC. The case is styled as Tristan Creasey, on behalf of himself
and others similarly situated v. Hydro Extrusion USA, LLC, Case No.
241100901 (Pa. Ct. of Common Pleas Cty., Nov. 7, 2024).
Hydro -- https://www.hydro.com/en-US -- operates multiple business
units offering aluminum in billets, extrusions, and precision
tubing.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark J. Gottesfeld, Esq.
WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC
715 Twining Road, Suite 211
Dresher, PA 19025
Phone: (215) 884-2491
INTERNATIONAL DIRECTIONAL: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID MONTENEGRO, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. INTERNATIONAL DIRECTIONAL DRILLING
INC. a/k/a IDD Corporation, Defendant, Case No. 0:24-cv-62065-XXXX
(S.D. Fla., Nov. 3, 2024) seeks to recover from the Defendant
unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated
damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards
Act.
Plaintiff Montenegro was employed by the Defendants as a
construction employee.
International Directional Drilling Inc. a/k/a IDD Corporation is a
drilling contractor. Defendants provide drilling services for the
installation of fiber-optic for telecommunications and utilities
for homes, businesses, and government agencies. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
ZANDRO E. PALMA, PA.
9100 S. Dadeland Blvd. Suite 1500
Miami, FL 33156
Telephone: (305) 446-1500
Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
Email: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com
IPW INDUSTRIES: Reid Sues Over Website's Barriers to Blind Users
----------------------------------------------------------------
CHELSIE REID, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. IPW INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-08331 (S.D.N.Y., November 1, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, the New York City Human Rights Law, and
declaratory relief.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed 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 persons. The Defendant's website,
www.isopurewater.com, contains access barriers which hinder the
Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online
goods, content, and services offered to the public through the
website. The accessibility issues on the website include, but not
limited to: missing alt-text, hidden elements on web pages,
incorrectly formatted lists, unannounced pop ups, unclear labels
for interactive elements, and the requirement that some events be
performed solely with a mouse, says the suit.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek 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 individuals.
IPW Industries, Inc. is a company that sells online goods and
services, doing business in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
J&H TACKLE: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Fernandez Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
DEVIN FERNANDEZ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. J&H Tackle, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-07717 (E.D.N.Y.,
Nov. 5, 2024) sues the Defendant for their failure to design,
construct, maintain, and operate their website to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other
blind or visually-impaired persons, pursuant to the Americans with
Disabilities Act (the "ADA").
The Defendant is denying the blind and visually impaired persons
throughout the United States with equal access to services J&H
Tackle provides to their non-disabled customers through
https://www.jandh.com, the suit asserts.
On Oct. 28, 2024, the Plaintiff decided to search for a store
specializing in fishing gear and supplies to find a replacement for
his defective fishing reel. While browsing online, he discovered
the Defendant's website. After choosing a product, he wanted to
change the quantity of the item, but the corresponding field had an
unclear and ambiguous label. This made it difficult for him to
adjust the number of items he wanted to purchase, further
complicating his shopping experience, the suit says.
The actions of Defendant were and are allegedly in violation of the
New York State Human Rights Law and therefore the Plaintiff invokes
his right to injunctive relief to remedy the discrimination.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in J&H
Tackle's policies, practices, and procedures so that the
Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to the blind
and visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks
compensatory damages to compensate Class members for having been
subjected to unlawful discrimination.
J&H Tackle specializes in fishing gear including rods, reels, line,
hooks, lures, weights, and apparel.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gabriel A. Levy, Esq.
GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C.
1129 Northern Blvd, Suite 404
Manhasset, NY 11030
Telephone: (347) 941-4715
E-mail: Glevyfirm@gmail.com
J&L SKY CONTRACTORS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Lopez Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
LUIS PATRICIO LOPEZ, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. J&L SKY CONTRACTORS CORP.; and
BENJAMIN LOPEZ; and JHON LOPEZ, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-07661
(E.D.N.Y., Nov. 1, 2024) seeks to recover from the Defendants
unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated
damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards
Act.
Plaintiff Lopez was employed by the Defendants as a laborer.
J&L Sky Contractors Corp. is engaged in the construction business.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Roman Avshalumov, Esq.
Helen F. Dalton & Associates, P.C.
80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601
Kew Gardens, NY 11415
Telephone: (718) 263-9591
JB HUNT: Faces Lee Suit Over Truck Drivers' Unpaid Overtime
-----------------------------------------------------------
RODNEY LEE AND ADRIAN MARCH, on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. JB HUNT TRANSPORT SERVICES, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 5:24-cv-05223-TLB (W.D. Ark., October 30, 2024)
is an action brought by the Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and
all others similarly situated against the Defendant for violations
of the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees were truck
drivers who were responsible for training new drivers to properly
and safely use and operate Defendant's vehicles. While they
consistently worked more than forty hours per week, they were not
paid overtime premiums for any overtime hours, say the Plaintiffs.
This collective action seeks to recover the unpaid overtime wages
and other damages owed to Defendant's employees under the FLSA
within the applicable limitations period.
JB Hunt Transport, Inc. is a transportation and trucking company in
the United States. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Josef F. Buenker, Esq.
THE BUENKER LAW FIRM
P.O. Box 10099
Houston, TX 77206
Telephone: (713) 868-3388
Facsimile: (713) 683-9940
E-mail: jbuenker@buenkerlaw.com
- and -
Douglas B. Welmaker, Esq.
WELMAKER LAW, PLLC
409 N. Fredonia, Suite 118
Longview, TX 75601
Telephone: (512) 799-2048
E-mail: doug@welmakerlaw.com
JCS INVESTIGATIONS: Coleman Sues Over Failure to Overtime Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Sebine Coleman and Selest Coleman, Individually and on behalf of
others similarly situated v. JCS INVESTIGATIONS AND SECURITY LLC,
Case No. 8:24-cv-02607-KKM-SPF (M.D. Fla., Nov. 8, 2024), is
brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 ("FLSA")
as a result of the Defendant's failure to pay overtime wages.
The Plaintiffs were compensated at the rate of $15.00 per hour and
worked substantial hours in excess of forty hours in a workweek.
the Defendant failed to keep accurate time records regarding the
hours Plaintiffs worked. Plaintiffs estimate they worked between
eighty and eighty-four hours per week. Plaintiffs worked for weeks
without receiving any pay at all, says the complaint.
The Plaintiffs began their employments as Security Guards.
The Defendant is a Florida corporation, licensed and authorized to
conduct business in Hillsborough County, Florida.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Wolfgang M. Florin, Esq.
Miguel Bouzas, Esq.
FLORIN | GRAY
16524 Pointe Village Drive, Suite 100
Lutz, FL 33558
Phone: (727) 220-4000
Facsimile: (727) 483-7942
Email: wflorin@floringray.com
miguel@floringray.com
JETTY LIFE: Gaspa Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
----------------------------------------------------------
VERONICA GASPA, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. JETTY LIFE, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
3:24-cv-10174 (D.N.J., October 30, 2024) arises from the
Defendant's failure to make its digital properties, including
website https://jettylife.com/, accessible to legally blind
individuals, which violates the effective communication and equal
access requirements of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
During Plaintiff's visit to the website, on August 22, 2024, she
attempted to purchase a sweater or a similar alternative from the
Defendant. While browsing, the Plaintiff came across Defendant's
website, which seemed to provide the product category she was
looking for. However, she encountered accessibility issues on the
site that made it difficult to browse for more information about
their location or even complete the purchase online. Due to
Defendant's failure to build the website in a manner that is
compatible with screen access programs, the Plaintiff was unable to
understand and properly interact with the website, says the suit.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
its website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers.
Jetty Life, LLC operates the Jettylife.com online retail store
across the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Uri Horowitz, Esq.
14441 70th Road
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (718) 705-8706
Facsimile: (718) 705-8705
E-mail: Uri@Horowitzlawpllc.com
JOHN DOES: American Civil Liberties Sues Over Voter Intimidation
----------------------------------------------------------------
The American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated v. John Does 1-6, Case
No. 2:24-cv-12950-TGB-A (E.D. Mich., Nov. 5, 2024), is brought
alleging that Defendants' campaign of voter intimidation violates
the Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871 and Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights
Act, and Article II, Section 4 of the Michigan Constitution.
The Defendants, by engaging in intimidating behavior including
travelling to multiple polling locations and illegally recording
voters inside polling locations, following a voter to her car as
she exited a polling place, and threatening that violence may
befall the child of a different voter should Kamala Harris win the
election, are actively depriving Michigan voters, including the
members of ACLU, of their fundamental right to vote free from
intimidation, harassment, threats, or other forms of coercion.
Defendants have already prevented Michiganders from casting their
vote free from intimidation, threats, harassments, and coercion and
their conduct threatens to prevent further Michiganders from
exercising their right to vote altogether.
The Defendants' illegal recording of voters, including following a
voter to her car and other intimidating conduct has discouraged and
threatens to deprive future individuals who are members of the ACLU
of the opportunity to cast their ballots and having them counted
without undue burden, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff American Civil Liberties Union of Michigan ("ACLU")
is the Michigan affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union.
The Defendants John Doe 1 through 6 are unnamed individuals who are
engaging in the aforementioned intimidating behavior, one of whom
was concealing their face while engaging in this intimidating
conduct.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rob Fram, Esq.
COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
415 Mission Street, Suite 5400
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone: (415) 591-7025
Email: RFram@cov.com
- and -
Philip Mayor, Esq.
Daniel S. Korobkin, Esq.
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FUND OF MICHIGAN
2966 Woodward Ave.
Detroit, MI 48201
Phone: (313) 578-6803
Email: pmayor@aclumich.org
- and -
Kait Demers, Esq.
William Meyer, Esq.
Hassan Ahmad, Esq.
Stephanie King, Esq.
COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
850 Tenth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Phone: (202) 662-5292
Email: GLevy@cov.com
KDemers@cov.com
WMeyer@cov.com
HAhmad@cov.com
StKing@cov.com
JP MORGAN: Santourian Suit Removed to C.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Zvard Santourian, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION; and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, Case No. 24STCV08963 was
removed from the Superior Court of the State of California for the
County of Los Angeles, to the United States District Court for the
Central District of California, on Nov. 1, 2024, and assigned Case
No. 2:24-cv-09498.
The Plaintiff seeks a declaratory judgment, compensatory damages,
restitution, injunctive relief, penalties, prejudgment and
postjudgment interest on all sums awarded, costs of suit, and
attorneys' fees for the following claims: failure to reimburse
business expenses and unfair business practices in violation of
California Business & Professions Code.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Carrie A. Gonell, Esq.
Alexander L. Grodan, Esq.
Hannah V. Schnell, Esq.
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
600 Anton Boulevard, Suite 1800
Costa Mesa, CA 92626-7653
Phone: +1.714.830.0600
Fax: +1.714.830.0700
Email: carrie.gonell@morganlewis.com
alexander.grodan@morganlewis.com
hannah.schnell@morganlewis.com
K-MAC ENTERPRISES: Austin Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation
----------------------------------------------------------------
Rashad Oniell Austin, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. K-MAC ENTERPRISES, INC. d/b/a TACO BELL, Case
No. 3:24-cv-02742-B (N.D. Tex., Oct. 31, 2024), is brought under
the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") for declaratory judgment,
monetary damages, liquidated damages, prejudgment interest, civil
penalties and costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees as a
result of Defendant's failure to pay Plaintiff and other hourly
employees sufficient overtime compensation for hours worked in
excess of 40 hours per week.
During his tenure with Defendant, Plaintiff often worked in excess
of 40 hours per week. When Plaintiff would work over 40 hours in
any week for Defendant, Plaintiff would receive a prorated rate for
such hours in an amount less than one and one-half times
Plaintiff's regular rate of pay. The Defendant failed to pay
Plaintiff and other hourly employees an overtime premium of one and
one-half times their regular rate of pay for their hours worked
during weeks in which they worked more than 40 hours for Defendant
even though Defendant was aware of how many hours Plaintiff and
other employees worked.
The Plaintiff and other hourly employees were and are entitled to
1.5 times their regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess
of 40 in a week. The Defendant knew, or showed reckless disregard
for whether, the way they paid Plaintiff and their other employees
violated the FLSA, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as an hourly paid worker.
The Defendant does business as Taco Bell.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Colby Qualls, Esq.
FORESTER HAYNIE, PLLC
400 North Saint Paul Street, Ste. 700
Dallas, TX 75201
Phone: (214) 210-2100
Email: cqualls@foresterhaynie.com
KANES FURNITURE: Blind Can't Access Online Store, Alexandria Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ERIKA ALEXANDRIA, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. KANES FURNITURE, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-08324 (S.D.N.Y., November 1, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, the New York City Human Rights Law, and
declaratory relief.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed 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 persons. The Defendant's website,
www.kanesfurniture.com, contains access barriers which hinder the
Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online
goods, content, and services offered to the public through the
website. The accessibility issues on the website include, but not
limited to: missing alt-text, hidden elements on web pages,
incorrectly formatted lists, unannounced pop ups, unclear labels
for interactive elements, and the requirement that some events be
performed solely with a mouse.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek 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 individuals.
Kanes Furniture, LLC is a company that sells online goods and
services, doing business in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
KEURIG DR PEPPER: Elliot Files Suit Over Beverages' False Ads
-------------------------------------------------------------
LILLIAN ELLIOT on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. KEURIG DR PEPPER, INC., Defendant, Case No.
2:24-at-01364 (E.D. Cal., October 29, 2024) is a consumer class
action for Defendant's alleged violation of state consumer
protection laws and statutes including unfair competition, false
advertising, breach of warranty, negligent misrepresentation, fraud
by omission, and fraudulent inducement.
The Defendant sells a variety of carbonated beverages described as
"ginger ales" and "diet ginger ales" under both its Schweppes and
Canada Dry brand names. The Defendant labels all of the products as
if they were solely naturally flavored. The products, however, all
contain undisclosed artificial flavoring. Several of the products'
labels claim or claimed during the Class period that they were
flavored only with "Natural ginger flavor" or "Natural flavors," or
that they were "Naturally flavored" or "Naturally flavored with
other natural flavors." However, all of these labels are and were
false and misleading, alleges the suit.
The Plaintiff, who purchased the products multiple times during the
proposed Class Period and was deceived by Defendant's alleged
unlawful conduct, brings this action on her own behalf and on
behalf of consumers in California and nationwide to remedy
Defendant's practices.
Keurig Dr Pepper, Inc. manufactures and distributes non-alcoholic
beverages.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kevin F. Ruf, Esq.
Marc L. Godino, Esq.
GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 201-9150
Facsimile: (310) 201-9160
E-mail: kevinruf@gmail.com
mgodino@glancylaw.com
KIDPIK CORP: M&A Investigates Proposed Merger With Nina Footwear
----------------------------------------------------------------
Monteverde & Associates PC (the "M&A Class Action Firm"),
headquartered at the Empire State Building in New York City, is
investigating Kidpik Corp. (NASDAQ: PIK), relating to its proposed
merger with Nina Footwear Corp. Under the terms of the agreement,
Nina Footwear stockholders will be issued shares of common stock of
Kidpik and upon closing, Nina Footwear's stockholders will own 80%
of Kidpik's outstanding common stock.
Click link for more information
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/kidpik-corp-pik/. It is free and
there is no cost or obligation to you.
NOT ALL LAW FIRMS ARE THE SAME. Before you hire a law firm, you
should talk to a lawyer and ask:
1. Do you file class actions and go to Court?
2. When was the last time you recovered money for
shareholders?
3. What cases did you recover money in and how much?
About Monteverde & Associates PC
Our firm litigates and has recovered money for shareholders . . .
and we do it from our offices in the Empire State Building. We are
a national class action securities firm with a successful track
record in trial and appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme
Court.
No company, director or officer is above the law. If you own common
stock in the above listed company and have concerns or wish to
obtain additional information free of charge, please visit our
website or contact Juan Monteverde, Esq. either via e-mail at
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com or by telephone at (212) 971-1341.
Contact:
Juan Monteverde, Esq.
MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC
The Empire State Building
350 Fifth Ave. Suite 4740
New York, NY 10118
United States of America
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com
Tel: (212) 971-1341
Attorney Advertising(C) 2024 Monteverde & Associates PC. The law
firm responsible for this advertisement is Monteverde & Associates
PC (www.monteverdelaw.com). Prior results do not guarantee a
similar outcome with respect to any future matter. [GN]
LANDMARK ADMIN: Fails to Secure Customers' Info, Montague Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
KARA MONTAGUE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. LANDMARK ADMIN, LLC, and LIBERTY BANKERS INSURANCE
GROUP, Case No. 3:24-cv-02794-L (N.D. Tex., Nov. 6, 2024) sues the
Defendants for failing to properly secure and safeguard the private
information that was entrusted to them.
On July 24, 2024, Landmark's investigation confirmed that between
May 13, 2024, and June 17, 2024, an unauthorized third-party gained
access to its IT Network and obtained the Private Information of
more than 800,000 individuals.
As a result of the Defendants' inadequate digital security and
notice process, the Plaintiff and Class Members' private
information was exposed to criminals. The Plaintiff and the Class
Members have suffered and will continue to suffer injuries
including: financial losses caused by misuse of their Private
Information; the loss or diminished value of their Private
Information as a result of the Data Breach; uncompensated lost time
associated with detecting and preventing identity theft; and theft
of personal and financial information, the suit says.
The Plaintiff and the proposed Class Members bring this class
action lawsuit on behalf of all persons who entrusted the
Defendants with sensitive Personally Identifiable Information
("PII") and Protected Health Information ("PHI") that was impacted
in a data breach that the Defendants publicly disclosed on Oct. 23,
2024.
Plaintiff Montague is a resident and citizen of Vancouver,
Washington. As a result of the Data Breach, the Plaintiff has
experienced a significant uptick in spam calls, texts, and emails.
Landmark is a third-party administrator for insurance
carriers.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joe Kendall, Esq.
KENDALL LAW GROUP, PLLC
3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 825
Dallas, TX 75219
Telephone: (214) 744-3000
Facsimile: (214) 744-3015
E-mail: jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com
- and -
Eduard Korsinsky, Esq.
LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
33 Whitehall Street, 17th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 363-7500
Facsimile: (212) 363-7171
E-mail: ek@zlk.com
LANDMARK ADMIN: Fails to Secure Customers' Personal Info, Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Randy Jackson, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Landmark Admin, LLC, and Liberty Bankers
Insurance Group, Defendants, Case No. 3:24-cv-02737-L (N.D. Tex.,
October 30, 2024) is a class action against Defendants for their
failure to properly secure and safeguard sensitive information of
Plaintiff and Class Members.
The class action arises out of the recent targeted cyberattack and
data breach on Defendants' network and systems that resulted in
unauthorized access to sensitive data. As a result of the data
breach, upon information and belief, the Plaintiffs and hundreds of
thousands of customers suffered ascertainable losses in the form of
the loss of the benefit of their bargain, out-of-pocket expenses,
and the value of their time reasonably incurred to remedy or
mitigate the effects of the attack.
In addition, the Plaintiff and Class Members' sensitive personal
information -- which was entrusted to Defendants, their officials,
and their agents -- was compromised and unlawfully accessed due to
the data breach, says the suit.
By this complaint, the Plaintiff seeks to remedy these harms on
behalf of himself and all similarly situated individuals whose
Private Information was accessed during the data breach.
Landmark Admin, LLC is a third-party administrator for insurance
carriers.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joe Kendall, Esq.
KENDALL LAW GROUP, PLLC
3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 825
Dallas, TX 75219
Telephone: (214) 744-3000
Facsimile: (214) 744-3015
E-mail: jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com
- and -
Terence R. Coates, Esq.
Jonathan T. Deters, Esq.
MARKOVITS, STOCK & DEMARCO, LLC
119 East Court Street, Suite 530
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Telephone: (513) 651-3700
Facsimile: (513) 665-0219
E-mail: tcoates@msdlegal.com
jdeters@msdlegal.com
LIFEHOUSE INC: Simmons Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against LIFEHOUSE, INC. The
case is styled as Donna Lee Simmons, individually and on behalf of
others similarly situated v. LIFEHOUSE, INC., Case No. CV0004079
(Cal. Super. Ct., Marin Cty., Sept. 26, 2024).
The case type is stated as "Unlimited Civil Other Employment."
Lifehouse -- https://www.lifehouseagency.org/ -- is a San Rafael
based non-profit organization serving people with developmental
disabilities in San Francisco, Marin, and Sonoma counties.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Shadi Sahebghalam, Esq.
Susan Rebecca Huerta, Esq.
PROTECTION LAW GROUP, LLP
149 Sheldon St.
El Segundo, CA 90245-3916
Phone: 424-290-3095
Email: shadi@protectionlawgroup.com
susan@protectionlawgroup.com
LILIUM N.V.: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set January 6, 2025
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Law Offices of Howard G. Smith announces that a class action
lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors who purchased Lilium
N.V. ("Lilium" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: LILM, LILMW; OTC: LILMF)
securities between June 11, 2024 and November 3, 2024, inclusive
(the "Class Period"). Lilium investors have until January 6, 2025
to file a lead plaintiff motion.
Investors suffering losses on their Lilium investments are
encouraged to contact the Law Offices of Howard G. Smith to discuss
their legal rights in this class action at 888-638-4847 or by email
to howardsmith@howardsmithlaw.com.
On October 24, 2024, before the market opened, Lilium disclosed
that it had been unable to raise sufficient additional funds to
continue the operations of the Company's principal operating wholly
owned German subsidiaries. As a result, the managing directors of
the subsidiaries determined that they are overindebted and are, or
will, become unable to pay their existing liabilities. The Company
disclosed that, subject to certain limited exceptions, the Company
will lose control of the subsidiaries.
On this news, Lilium's stock price fell $0.33, or 61.6%, to close
at $0.21 per share on October 24, 2024, on unusually heavy trading
volume. The Company's stock price continued to fall in the
subsequent trading day, falling $0.06, or 28.8%, to close at $0.15
per share on October 25, 2024, on unusually heavy trading volume.
Then, on November 4, 2024, before the market opened, the Company
reported that, following the insolvency of the Company's
subsidiaries, Lilium had not been able to raise sufficient
additional funds to conduct its ongoing business consistent with
past practice. The Company disclosed that "funding for the Company
is not feasible." As a consequence, the Company would be "obliged
to file for insolvency."
On this news, Lilium's stock price fell $0.015, or 15.5%, to close
at $0.083 per share on November 4, 2024, on unusually heavy trading
volume. The Company's stock price continued to fall in the
subsequent trading day, falling $0.031, or 36.97%, to close at
$0.052 per share on November 5, 2024, on unusually heavy trading
volume.
The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout
the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or
misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material
adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and
prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to
investors: (1) Defendants overstated the progress of the Company's
fundraising activities; (2) Defendants overstated the likelihood
and/or feasibility of obtaining sufficient funding to continue
operations; (3) Defendants failed to sufficiently disclose the
imminent insolvency of the Company and its subsidiaries; and (4)
that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements
about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were
materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
If you purchased Lilium securities, have information or would like
to learn more about these claims, or have any questions concerning
this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these
matters, please contact Howard G. Smith, Esquire, of Law Offices of
Howard G. Smith, 3070 Bristol Pike, Suite 112, Bensalem,
Pennsylvania 19020, by telephone at (215) 638-4847 or by email to
howardsmith@howardsmithlaw.com, or visit our website at
www.howardsmithlaw.com.
This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some
jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.
Contacts
Howard G. Smith, Esq.
Law Offices of Howard G. Smith
(215) 638-4847
howardsmith@howardsmithlaw.com
www.howardsmithlaw.com [GN]
LOUDPACK EXOTICS: Saunders Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
---------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL SAUNDERS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. LOUDPACK EXOTICS HOLDINGS, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-08478-JPO (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 7, 2024)
alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web
site, www.loudpackexotics.com, is not fully or equally accessible
to blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the Plaintiff,
in violation of 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 Web site will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.
Loudpack Exotics Holdings, LLC a recreational dispensary in
Syracuse, NY. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jon L. Norinsberg, Esq.
Bennitta L. Joseph, Esq.
JOSEPH & NORINSBERG, LLC
110 East 59th Street, Suite 2300
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (212) 227-5700
Facsimile: (212) 656-1889
Email: jon@norinsberglaw.com
bennitta@employeejustice.com
MARC SIEBERT: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Fernandez Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
DEVIN FERNANDEZ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Marc Siebert, VMD, P.C., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-07549 (E.D.N.Y., October 29, 2024) is a civil rights action
against Marc Siebert for its failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate their website,
https://www.heartofchelsea.com, to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New
York City Human Rights Law.
According to the complaint, the Plaintiff attempted to book a
consultation with a veterinary specialist for his pet's
examination. On September 20, 2024, he was looking for "vet clinics
in NYC" and discovered Heartofchelsea.com website. However, while
navigating the website, he encountered several accessibility issues
that hindered his ability to schedule an appointment. One
significant issue was that many links were incorrectly
programmatically constructed, causing the screen reader to announce
them as buttons, rather than actionable links. Additionally,
loading and informational messages on the booking page did not
adequately inform the users, leaving him unsure about the status of
his actions, says the suit.
These access barriers have caused the website to be inaccessible
to, and not independently usable by blind and visually-impaired
persons. Amongst other access barriers experienced, the Plaintiff
was unable to learn more information about veterinary center
locations and hours of operation, compare prices and benefits and
learn more information about the goods and services in its physical
location, the suit contends.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Marc Siebert's policies, practices, and procedures so that its
website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory
damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to
unlawful discrimination.
Marc Siebert, VMD, P.C. operates the website that provides
consumers with access to an array of veterinary services for
pets.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gabriel A. Levy, Esq.
GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C.
1129 Northern Blvd, Suite 404
Manhasset, NY 11030
Telephone: (347) 941-4715
E-mail: Glevyfirm@gmail.com
MATCH GROUP: Rosen Law Investigates Potential Securities Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
Why: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces
an investigation of potential securities claims on behalf of
shareholders of Match Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: MTCH) resulting from
allegations that Match Group may have issued materially misleading
business information to the investing public.
So What: If you purchased Match Group securities you may be
entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees
or costs through a contingency fee arrangement. The Rosen Law Firm
is preparing a class action seeking recovery of investor losses.
What to do next: To join the prospective class action, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=12766 or call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com
for information on the class action.
What is this about: On November 7, 2024, Investopedia published an
article entitled "Match Group Stock Slips as Fourth Quarter Outlook
Disappoints." This article said that "[s]hares of online dating
giant Match Group tumbled despite a third-quarter earnings beat
released after the bell. [. . .] Match said Tinder Direct revenue
came in below its own expectations, as the app's monthly active
users (MAUs) declined 9% from the same time last year and its
revenue per payer (RPP) grew less than expected. Some new features
tested with Tinder users in the quarter negatively impacted
subscription revenue, which the company said will likely also have
an impact on fourth quarter revenue."
On this news, the price of Match Group stock fell by 17.8% to close
at $31.11 per share on November 7, 2024.
Why Rosen Law: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel
with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms
issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or
any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not
actually litigate securities class actions. Be wise in selecting
counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the
globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved the
largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese
Company at the time. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS
Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class
action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4
each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of
dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438
million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was
named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's
attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.
Contacts
Laurence Rosen, Esq.
Phillip Kim, Esq.
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Tel: (212) 686-1060
Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
Fax: (212) 202-3827
E-mail: case@rosenlegal.com
www.rosenlegal.com [GN]
MEIJER INC: Macaroni Products Contain Preservatives, Most Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
RYAN MOST, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. MEIJER, INC., Defendants, Case No.
2024LA001298 (Ill. Cir., Dupage Cty., Nov. 1, 2023) alleges
violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Businesses
Practices Act.
According to the complaint, during the Class Period Defendant sold
all of its True Goodness Macaroni and Cheese products labeled,
marketed, and advertised as "free from artificial colors and
preservatives", but which actually contained sodium phosphate and
citric acid.
As a result of the Defendant's fraudulent labeling, Plaintiff and
the Class have been misled into purchasing Products that did not
provide them with the benefit of the bargain they paid money for,
namely that the Products would not contain artificial
preservatives. Further, the Defendant's fraudulent labeling, the
Plaintiff and the Class paid a price premium for premium Products,
but instead received non-premium Products, says the suit.
Meijer, Inc. operates a chain of discount stores. The Company
offers dairy, bakery, school, electronics, furniture, home decor,
clothing, garden, toys, sports, pet supplies, health, and other
grocery products. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C.
21031 Ventura Blvd., Suite 340
Woodland Hills, CA 91364
Telephone: (323) 306-4234
Facsimile: (866) 633-0228
Email: tfriedman@toddflaw.com
MIDNIGHT HUB: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set January 6
------------------------------------------------------------
WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces
the filing of a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of
ROOMS non-fungible tokens ("NFTs") and Digital Nomads NFTs issued
by Midnight Hub between January 15, 2023 and March 31, 2024, both
dates inclusive (the "Class Period"). If you wish to serve as lead
plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than January 6, 2025.
SO WHAT: If you purchased ROOMS NFTs and Digital Nomads NFTs during
the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without
payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency
fee arrangement.
WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Midnight Hub class action, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=30701 or call Phillip
Kim, Esq. at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com for more
information. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you
wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later
than January 6, 2025. A lead plaintiff is a representative party
acting on behalf of other class members in directing the
litigation.
WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel
with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms
issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or
any meaningful peer recognition. Be wise in selecting counsel. The
Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the
largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese
Company at the time. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS
Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class
action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4
each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of
dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438
million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was
named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's
attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.
DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, during the Class
Period, defendants' statements promoting the NFTs were untrue or
misleading statements of material fact. In truth, at the time
defendants sold the NFTs, defendants had no plan for developing
Midnight Hub's infrastructure or any of the platform's
decentralized projects such as the Digital Nomads TV. In fact,
defendants had no plans for the future of Midnight Hub aside from
profiting off the hype and excitement around the project. When the
true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors
suffered damages.
To join the Midnight Hub class action, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=30701 or call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com
for information on the class action.
No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are
not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select
counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member
and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any
potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead
plaintiff.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.
Contact Information:
Laurence Rosen, Esq.
Phillip Kim, Esq.
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Tel: (212) 686-1060
Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
Fax: (212) 202-3827
case@rosenlegal.com
www.rosenlegal.com [GN]
NEW YORK MAN: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Sumlin Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DENNIS SUMLIN, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. New York Man, Ltd., Case No. 1:24-cv-08453 (S.D.N.Y.,
Nov. 6, 2024) contends that the Defendant failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate their website to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other
blind or visually-impaired persons, in violation of the Americans
with Disabilities Act.
The Defendant is denying blind and visually impaired persons
throughout the United States with equal access to the goods and
services New York Man provides to their non-disabled customers
through https://www.nymsuits.com, the suit alleges.
On Oct. 22, 2024, the Plaintiff was searching for an online store
to order both dress and casual pieces of clothing suitable for the
fall season. While browsing the Defendant's website and reviewing
their products, he chose the Sergio Tacchini Olmi Track Jacket.
However, the Plaintiff encountered several accessibility barriers
that hindered his ability to navigate the site and purchase the
desired product, the suit says.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in New
York Man's policies, practices, and procedures so that the
Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory
damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to
unlawful discrimination.
New York Man offers man's suits, tuxedos, shirts, jackets, pants,
jeans, footwear and accessories.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Asher Cohen, Esq.
ASHER COHEN PLLC
2377 56th Dr,
Brooklyn, NY 11234
Telephone: (718) 914-9694
E-mail: acohen@ashercohenlaw.com
NOBLE & COOLEY: Delacruz Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
-----------------------------------------------------------------
EMANUEL DELACRUZ, on behalf of himself and all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. NOBLE & COOLEY COMPANY, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-08199 (S.D.N.Y., October 29, 2024) is a
civil rights action against the Defendant for its failure to
design, construct, maintain, and operate its interactive website,
https://noblecooley.com, to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New
York City Human Rights Law.
During Plaintiff's visits to the website, the last occurring on
October 2, 2024, in an attempt to purchase a Novo Cooling Bongo
Drum from Defendant and to view the information on the website, he
encountered multiple access barriers that denied him a shopping
experience similar to that of a sighted person and full and equal
access to the goods and services offered to the public and made
available to the public. He was unable to locate pricing and was
not able to add the item to the cart due to broken links, pictures
without alternate attributes and other barriers on Defendant's
website, which prevented him from doing so, says the suit.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
its website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers.
Noble & Cooley Company, LLC is an American musical instruments
manufacturing company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
PEPSICO BEVERAGE: Teamsters Sues Over Mass Layoff Without Notice
----------------------------------------------------------------
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 727, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PEPSICO BEVERAGE NORTH AMERICA,
Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-11285 (N.D. Ill., November 1, 2024) is
a class action against the Defendant for violation of the Worker
Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act of 1988.
The case arises from the Defendant's failure to provide the
Plaintiff and other similarly situated former employees at least 60
days' advance written notice of termination as a result of a mass
layoff and/or plant closing on or about October 28, 2024.
Teamsters Local 727 is a labor organization with members in
Illinois.
Pepsico Beverage North America is a manufacturer of beverages doing
business in Illinois. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph D. Richardson, Esq.
WILLIG, WILLIAMS & DAVIDSON
1845 Walnut Street, 24th Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 656-3655
Email: jrichardson@wwdlaw.com
PINE ISLAND: Fails to Pay Minimum & OT Wages, King Suit Says
------------------------------------------------------------
BLAKE KING, on behalf of himself and all others similarly-situated
v. PINE ISLAND NOODLES, LLC, and BRAD ESPOSITE, Case No.
2:24-cv-04133-MHW-CMV (S.D. Ohio, Nov. 5, 2024) alleges that the
Defendants systematically failed to pay the Plaintiff and other
similarly situated employees for all hours worked, resulting in the
systemic payment of subminimum wages and the failure to pay
overtime, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Ohio
Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act.
The suit says that Mr. King and other similarly situated employees
would travel from location to location across the states served by
Island Noodle, where they would set up the Island Noodle food truck
and cook and sell food. However, Mr. King and those similarly
situated were not paid for the time it took to travel from location
to location.
Further, Island Noodle paid King and those similarly situated the
same hourly rate for overtime hours as it did for regular,
non-overtime hours.
On behalf of himself and all other similarly situated employees,
Mr. King brings this collective action for the recovery of unpaid
overtime under the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. section 216(b) and pursuant to
Ohio R.C. section 4111.10(C). Mr. King separately brings a claim
for retaliatory termination in violation of the FLSA and the
OMFWSA.
The Plaintiff and those similarly situated are entitled to all
legal and equitable remedies available for violations of the FLSA,
including back pay, liquidated damages, pre-judgment and
post-judgment interest, reasonable attorneys' fees and litigation
costs, and other compensation pursuant to the FLSA, the suit
contends.
Mr. King was employed by Island Noodle as a cook in June of 2017.
Island Noodles is a food vendor that operates food trucks and food
stands at various fairs, carnivals, and other outdoors venues in
Florida, Ohio, Tennessee, Indiana, Virginia, and Kentucky.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Chris Wido, Esq.
SPITZ, THE EMPLOYEE'S ATTORNEY
3 Summit Park Dr., Suite 200
Independence, OH 44131
Telephone: (216) 291-4744
Facsimile: (216) 291-5744
E-mail: Chris.Wido@Spitzlawfirm.com
PLUS500US FINANCIAL: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Miller Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
KIMBERLY MILLER, on behalf of herself and all other persons
similarly situated v. PLUS500US FINANCIAL SERVICES, LLC, Case No.
1:24-cv-01082 (W.D.N.Y., Nov. 6, 2024) sues the Defendant for its
failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its interactive
website, https://us.plus500.com, to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired persons, pursuant to the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
During Plaintiff's visits to the Website, the last occurring on
Oct. 6, 2024, in an attempt to sign up for +500 Futures Trading
Association from the Defendant and to view the information on the
Website, the Plaintiff encountered multiple access barriers that
denied the Plaintiff a shopping experience similar to that of a
sighted person and full and equal access to the goods and services
offered to the public and made available to the public, the suit
says.
The Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer frustration and
humiliation as a result of the discriminatory conditions present on
the Defendant's Website. These discriminatory conditions continue
to contribute to Plaintiff's sense of isolation and segregation.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
the Defendant's Website will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.
Plus500US is a provider of trading services intended to serve
traders. The company offers a proprietary technology trading
platform for futures commission merchant services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
PROCTER & GAMBLE: Pinto Sues Over Plug-In Air Fresheners' False Ads
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MARIANNE PINTO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY, Defendant,
Case No. 1:24-cv-07700 (E.D.N.Y., November 4, 2024) is a class
action against the Defendant for breach of express warranty,
injunctive and equitable relief, unjust enrichment, common law
fraud, and violation of New York's General Business Law.
The case arises from the Defendant's false, deceptive, and
misleading advertising, labeling, and marketing of plug-in air
fresheners under the Febreze brand. The Defendant advertised that
each oil refill provides "First day fresh for 50 days." However, in
reality, the life of each oil refill air freshener is about 25 to
30 days. As a result of the Defendant's misrepresentations, the
Plaintiff and Class members purchased the plug-in air fresheners
and incurred damages, says the suit.
The Procter & Gamble Company is a consumer goods company, with its
principal place of business in Cincinnati, Ohio. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph LoPiccolo, Esq.
John N. Poulos, Esq.
Anthony Almeida, Esq.
POULOS LOPICCOLO PC
1460 Broadway, 15th Floor, Suite 15003
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: (732) 757-0165
Facsimile: (732) 358-0180
Email: lopiccolo@pllawfirm.com
poulos@pllawfirm.com
almeida@pllawfirm.com
- and -
Joseph K. Jones, Esq.
Benjamin J. Wolf, Esq.
JONES, WOLF & KAPASI, LLC
One Grand Central Place
630 3rd Avenue, 18th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Telephone: (646) 459-7971
Facsimile: (646) 459-7973
Email: jkj@legaljones.com
bwolf@legaljones.com
RASA FLOORS: Soriano Seeks Unpaid Overtime for Floor Installers
---------------------------------------------------------------
MANUEL SORIANO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. RASA FLOORS & CARPET CLEANING, LLC; and
MICHAEL RASA; individually and as officer, directors, shareholder,
and/or principal of Rasa Floors & Carpet Cleaning, LLC, Defendants,
Case No. 1:24-cv-01339 (W.D. Tex., November 1, 2024) is a class
action against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Mr. Soriano worked for the Defendants as a floor and carpet
installer from 2022 until April of 2024.
Rasa Floors & Carpet Cleaning LLC is a carpet and flooring
installation company doing business in Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ruth M. Willars, Esq.
MONTY & RAMIREZ LLP
150 W. Parker Road, 3rd Floor
Houston, TX 77076
Telephone: (281) 493-5529
Facsimile: (281) 493-5983
Email: rwillars@montyramirezlaw.com
RETAIL OPPORTUNITY: M&A Probes Proposed Merger With Blackstone
--------------------------------------------------------------
Monteverde & Associates PC (the "M&A Class Action Firm"),
headquartered at the Empire State Building in New York City, is
investigating:
-- Retail Opportunity Investments Corp. (Nasdaq:ROIC), relating
to its proposed merger with Blackstone. Under the terms of the
agreement, Blackstone Real Estate Partners X will acquire all
outstanding common shares of ROIC for $17.50 per share in an
all-cash transaction.
Click link for more information
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/retail-opportunity-investments-roic/.
It is free and there is no cost or obligation to you.
-- Fresh Vine Wine, Inc. (NYSE American:VINE), relating to its
proposed merger with Adifex Holdings, LLC. Under the terms of the
proposal, Fresh Vine and Adifex intend to enter into a definitive
agreement under which Fresh Vine will acquire 100% of the issued
and outstanding membership interests of Adifex, via a share
exchange transaction.
Click link for more information
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/fresh-vine-wine-inc-vine/. It is
free and there is no cost or obligation to you.
-- AlloVir, Inc. (NASDAQ:ALVR), relating to its proposed merger
with Kalaris Therapeutics. Under the terms of the agreement,
AlloVir will acquire 100% of the outstanding equity interest of
Kalaris. Upon completion of the Merger, pre-Merger AlloVir
stockholders are expected to own approximately 25.05% of the
combined company and pre-Merger Kalaris stockholders are expected
to own approximately 74.95% of the combined company.
Click link for more
informationhttps://monteverdelaw.com/case/allovir-inc-alvr/.It is
free and there is no cost or obligation to you.
-- Avi Bioservices, Inc. (NASDAQ:CDMO), relating to its proposed
acquisition by GHO Capital Partners and Ampersand Capital Partners.
Under the terms of the agreement, GHO and Ampersand would acquire
all the outstanding shares held by Avid's stockholders for $12.50
per share in cash.
Click link for more information
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/avid-bioservices-inc-cdmo/.It is
free and there is no cost or obligation to you.
NOT ALL LAW FIRMS ARE THE SAME. Before you hire a law firm, you
should talk to a lawyer and ask:
1. Do you file class actions and go to Court?
2. When was the last time you recovered money for
shareholders?
3. What cases did you recover money in and how much?
About Monteverde & Associates PC
Our firm litigates and has recovered money for shareholders . . .
and we do it from our offices in the Empire State Building. We are
a national class action securities firm with a successful track
record in trial and appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme
Court.
No company, director or officer is above the law. If you own common
stock in any of the above listed companies and have concerns or
wish to obtain additional information free of charge, please visit
our website or contact Juan Monteverde, Esq. either via e-mail at
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com or by telephone at (212) 971-1341.
Contact:
Juan Monteverde, Esq.
MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC
The Empire State Building
350 Fifth Ave. Suite 4740
New York, NY 10118
United States of America
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com
Tel: (212) 971-1341
Attorney Advertising. (C) 2024 Monteverde & Associates PC. The law
firm responsible for this advertisement is Monteverde & Associates
PC (www.monteverdelaw.com). Prior results do not guarantee a
similar outcome with respect to any future matter. [GN]
SAINT XAVIER: Fails to Protect Applicants' Info, Martinez Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------------
IRIDIAN MARTINEZ, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. SAINT XAVIER UNIVERSITY, Case No. 1:24-cv-11405 (N.D.
Ill., Nov. 5, 2024) alleges that the Defendant unlawfully breached
its duty to the Plaintiff and Class members by failing to exercise
reasonable care in protecting and safeguarding Plaintiff's and
Class Members' personal identifiable information within Defendant's
possession.
Between June 29 and July 18, 2023, an unknown and unauthorized
criminal actor gained access to SXU's network and exfiltrated, at a
minimum, name and Social Security number. As a result of the Data
Breach, the Plaintiff and Class Members suffered injury and
ascertainable losses in the form of the present and imminent threat
of fraud and identity theft, loss of the benefit of their bargain,
out-of-pocket expenses, loss of value of their time reasonably
incurred to remedy or mitigate the effects of the attack, and the
loss of, and diminution in, value of their personal information,
the lawsuit asserts.
In addition, the Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive PII
—which was entrusted to the Defendant — was compromised and
unlawfully accessed due to the Data Breach. This information, while
compromised and taken by unauthorized third parties, remains also
in the possession of the Defendant, and without additional
safeguards and independent review and oversight, remains vulnerable
to future cyberattacks and theft.
The Plaintiff brings this class action lawsuit on behalf of those
similarly situated to address Defendant's inadequate safeguarding
of Class Members' PII that the Defendant collected and maintained,
and for failing to provide timely and adequate notice to the
Plaintiff and other Class Members that their information had been
subject to the unauthorized access by an unknown third party.
Plaintiff Martinez is an individual citizen of Illinois and
received a Notice of Data Security Incident letter from the
Defendant on Oct. 30, 2024. The Plaintiff Martinez's data was
exposed because she submitted an application to attend SXU.
Saint Xavier University is a private Roman Catholic university in
Chicago, Illinois.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
Leanna Loginov, Esq.
SHAMIS & GENTILE P.A.
14 NE 1st Ave., Suite 705
Miami, FL 33132
Telephone: (305) 479-2299
E-mail: ashamis@shamisgentile.com
SKI HUT: Jones Sues Over Blind Users' Equal Access to Online Store
------------------------------------------------------------------
CLAY LEE JONES, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. THE SKI HUT, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-08338 (S.D.N.Y., November 1, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of Title III of the Americans
with Disabilities Act, the New York City Human Rights Law, and
declaratory relief.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed 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 persons. The Defendant's website,
www.outdoorsports.com, contains access barriers which hinder the
Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online
goods, content, and services offered to the public through the
website. The accessibility issues on the website include, but not
limited to: missing alt-text, hidden elements on web pages,
incorrectly formatted lists, unannounced pop ups, unclear labels
for interactive elements, and the requirement that some events be
performed solely with a mouse, says the suit.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek 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 individuals.
The Ski Hut, Inc. is a company that sells online goods and
services, doing business in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
STRIDE INC: Rosen Law Investigates Potential Securities Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Why: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces
an investigation of potential securities claims on behalf of
shareholders of Stride, Inc. (NYSE: LRN) resulting from allegations
that Stride may have issued materially misleading business
information to the investing public.
So What: If you purchased Stride securities you may be entitled to
compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs
through a contingency fee arrangement. The Rosen Law Firm is
preparing a class action seeking recovery of investor losses.
What to do next: To join the prospective class action, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=30689 or call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com
for information on the class action.
What is this about: On October 16, 2024, Fuzzy Panda Research
issued a report entitled "Stride Inc (LRN) -- The Last Covid Over
Earner -- Hiding That Est >25% of EBITDA Came from Covid Funds."
In this report, Fuzzy Panda announced that it had a short position
in Stride, in part, because Stride was the "last Covid over-earning
stock yet to fall. The stock is near its highs [. . .] but
investors are clueless about the looming Covid funding cliff.
Investors don't know because Stride management has NOT told them.
[. . . ] Former Stride executives told us that management misled
investors."
On this news, the price of Stride stock fell by $6.55 per share, or
9.2%, to close at $64.04 on October 16, 2024.
Why Rosen Law: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel
with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms
issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or
any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not
actually litigate securities class actions. Be wise in selecting
counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the
globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved the
largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese
Company at the time. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS
Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class
action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4
each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of
dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438
million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was
named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's
attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.
Contact Information:
Laurence Rosen, Esq.
Phillip Kim, Esq.
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Tel: (212) 686-1060
Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
Fax: (212) 202-3827
case@rosenlegal.com
www.rosenlegal.com [GN]
T-MOBILE USA: Charges Hidden Fees; Refuses to Arbitrate, Beets Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
CARRIE BEETS, KENDRA CONWAY, ANGELICA SHATOKIN, VALERIE LA HAIE,
MORGAN FLINT, LADEANNA JACKSON, MIKE XAVIER, LAKEA DIWA, GIOVANETT
OMBLER, JESSICA PETE, ANDREA BROOKS, KIANNI DESILVA, JOHN WARD,
ANGELA HAYES, ASAD S. FARHAD, ZAYAH GALICIA, LAURICE DAVIS, ARNALDO
MORENO, VISHAL SHAH, ROBERT LOVE, JESUS MENDEZ, TRISTAN CAMPBELL,
ANNE FRY, et al., individually an on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. T-MOBILE USA, INC., Defendant, Case No.
2:24-cv-09344 (C.D. Cal., October 29, 2024) seeks redress against
the Defendant for its deceptive practice of charging a contrived
and misleading "Regulatory Programs and Telco Recovery Fee" to its
customers, including Plaintiffs.
According to the complaint, T-Mobile began illegally charging a
hidden "Regulatory Programs Fee" in 2004. Then, in 2016, T-Mobile
added a "Telco Recovery Fee." The combined "Regulatory Programs and
Telco Recovery Fee" began at $2.71 per line/per month, and has
since increased to $3.49 per line/per month: 28% over the last
eight years. To conceal these illegal fees, T-Mobile includes the
RPTR Fee in the section of their customer's monthly bill that
bundles this fee with "Government Taxes and Fees" to disguise it as
a required government charge, pass-through fee, or other
regulatory-mandated fee. In reality, the RPTR Fee is a concoction
designed to increase T-Mobile's revenue and pad its bottom line,
says the suit.
The Plaintiffs are individuals who filed individual arbitrations in
the American Arbitration Association in 2023. Even though
arbitration of disputes is mandatory under T-Mobile's arbitration
agreement, and purports to be the only means for any customer to
seek redress, T-Mobile chose to default on its obligation to
participate in and pay for each arbitration. Because of T-Mobile's
choice to default under its own arbitration agreement, the AAA
administratively closed the arbitrations on March 15, 2023.
As T-Mobile's refusal to arbitrate any of the claims filed
constitutes a material breach of their arbitration agreement under
California law, the Plaintiffs bring this action in Court on behalf
of themselves and others similarly situated.
T-Mobile USA, Inc. is an American wireless network operator
headquartered in Bellevue, Washington.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Alex Winnick, Esq.
WINNICK LAW, PC
2450 Colorado Ave., Suite 100E
Santa Monica, CA 90404
Telephone: (424) 317-7411
E-mail: aw@winlawpc.com
- and -
Evan Murphy, Esq.
MURPHY ADVOCATES LLC
999 18th Street, Suite 3000
Denver, CO 80203
Telephone: (314) 753-5212
E-mail: evan@murphyadvocates.com
- and -
Maurice Mitts, Esq.
Mitts Law LLC
1822 Spruce Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 866-0110
E-mail: mmitts@mittslaw.com
TD BANK: Faces Chiew Suit Over Improper Fees, Interest Charges
--------------------------------------------------------------
ALEXANDER CHIEW, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. TD BANK, N.A., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-07566 (E.D.N.Y., October 29, 2024) is an action on behalf
of himself and a proposed class of all similarly situated consumers
against Defendant TD Bank, N.A., arising from its unfair,
deceptive, and unlawful practice of assessing cash advance fees and
immediately-accruing interest on credit card purchases that are not
"cash advances" as that term is used in TD Bank's Credit Card
Agreement.
According to the complaint, TD Bank, like most major credit card
issuers, charges its customers steep Cash Advance Fees when
customers elect to use their credit card to receive cash from an
ATM or from a bank teller. The Plaintiff purchased jewelry with his
credit card using the peer-to-peer money transfer mobile
application Wise. Unbeknownst to Plaintiff, TD Bank unilaterally
and in its sole discretion elected to treat Plaintiff's purchase of
jewelry as a "cash advance," and charged Plaintiff a cash advance
fee plus immediately accruing interest, the suit says.
The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself and a
proposed class of all other similarly situated TD Bank credit card
holders who were improperly charged Cash Advance Fees on
transactions that were not "cash-like transactions." He seeks to
end TD Bank's deceptive practices and force it to refund improper
fees and interest charges.
TD Bank, N.A. is a national bank with its headquarters and
principal place of business in Cherry Hill, New Jersey.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
Edwin E. Elliott, Esq.
SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A.
14 NE 1st Avenue, Suite 705
Miami, FL 33132
Telephone: (305) 479-2299
E-mail: ashamis@shamsigentile.com
edwine@shamisgentile.com
- and -
Sophia Goren Gold, Esq.
KALIELGOLD PLLC
950 Gilman Street, Ste 200
Berkeley, CA 94710
Telephone: (202) 350-4783
E-mail: sgold@kalielgold.com
- and -
Jeffrey D. Kaliel, Esq.
KALIELGOLD PLLC
1100 15th Street NW 4th Floor
Washington, D.C. 20005
Telephone: (202) 350-4783
E-mail: jkaliel@kalielpllc.com
TIMKEN CO: Faces Landi Wage-and-Hour Suit in N.D. Ohio
------------------------------------------------------
Walter E. Landi, individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. The Timken Company, an Ohio
corporation, Defendant, Case No. 5:24-cv-01898-JRA (N.D. Ohio,
October 30, 2024) arises under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the
Illinois Minimum Wage Law, and the Illinois Wage Payment and
Collection Act for Defendants' failure to pay Plaintiffs, and other
similarly situated employees, minimum wages, overtime wages, and
earned wages.
The Plaintiff was a full-time employee of Timken who worked as a
non-exempt laborer from 2012 through June 1, 2024. As a result of
failing to include non-discretionary bonuses in Plaintiffs -- the
Collective Members' and the Class Members' -- regular rates of pay
prior to computing their overtime compensation, Timken has violated
the overtime provisions of the FLSA and IMWL, says the suit.
The Timken Co. is a global manufacturer of bearings and power
transmission products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael L. Fradin, Esq.
8 N. Court St. Suite 403
Athens, Ohio 45701
Telephone: (847) 986-5889
Facsimile: (847) 673-1228
E-mail: mike@fradinlaw.com
- and -
James L. Simon, Esq.
SIMON LAW CO.
11 1/2 N. Franklin Street
Chagrin Falls, OH 44022
Telephone: (216) 816-8696
E-mail: james@simonsayspay.com
TMC THE METALS CO: Faces Shareholder Class Action Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------
Robbins LLP announces that a shareholder filed a class action on
behalf of all persons and entities that purchased or otherwise
acquired TMC the metals company Inc. (NASDAQ: TMC) securities
between May 12, 2023 and March 25, 2024. TMC is a deep-sea minerals
exploration company focused on the collection, processing, and
refining of polymetallic nodules.
For more information, submit a form, email attorney Aaron Dumas,
Jr., or give us a call at (800) 350-6003.
The Allegations: Robbins LLP is Investigating Allegations that TMC
the metals company Inc. (TMC) Failed to Disclose its Deficient
Internal Controls Over Financial Reporting
According to the complaint, during the class period, defendants
failed to disclose that: (i) TMC maintained deficient internal
controls over financial reporting; (ii) as a result, the Company
inaccurately classified the sale of future revenue attributable to
the LCR Partnership as deferred income rather than debt; and (iii)
the foregoing misclassification, when it became known, would
require TMC to restate one or more of its previously issued
financial statements.
Plaintiff alleges that on March 25, 2024, TMC disclosed in a filing
with the SEC that the Company's financial statements for the first
three quarters of 2023 "should be restated and, accordingly, should
no longer be relied upon", citing the "re-evaluat[ion of] whether
the offsetting entry to the proceeds it received from LCR should be
classified as debt or deferred income." Further, TMC explained
that, "[a]s the transaction with LCR was considered an equity
investment rather than a sale transaction, the sale of future
revenue will be reclassified as Royalty liability" per appropriate
accounting standards. On this news, TMC's stock price fell $0.205
per share, or 13.23%, to close at $1.345 per share on March 26,
2024.
What Now: You may be eligible to participate in the class action
against TMC the metals company Inc. Shareholders who want to serve
as lead plaintiff for the class must submit their application to
the court by January 7, 2025. A lead plaintiff is a representative
party who acts on behalf of other class members in directing the
litigation. You do not have to participate in the case to be
eligible for a recovery. If you choose to take no action, you can
remain an absent class member. For more information, click here.
All representation is on a contingency fee basis. Shareholders pay
no fees or expenses.
About Robbins LLP: Some law firms issuing releases about this
matter do not actually litigate securities class actions; Robbins
LLP does. A recognized leader in shareholder rights litigation, the
attorneys and staff of Robbins LLP have been dedicated to helping
shareholders recover losses, improve corporate governance
structures, and hold company executives accountable for their
wrongdoing since 2002. Since our inception, we have obtained over
$1 billion for shareholders.
To be notified if a class action against TMC the metals company
Inc. settles or to receive free alerts when corporate executives
engage in wrongdoing, sign up for Stock Watch today.
Attorney Advertising. Past results do not guarantee a similar
outcome. [GN]
UNISYS CORP: Rosen Law Probes Potential Securities Claims
---------------------------------------------------------
Why: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces
an investigation of potential securities claims on behalf of
shareholders of Unisys Corporation (NYSE: UIS) resulting from
allegations that Unisys may have issued materially misleading
business information to the investing public.
So What: If you purchased Unisys securities you may be entitled to
compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs
through a contingency fee arrangement. The Rosen Law Firm is
preparing a class action seeking recovery of investor losses.
To join the prospective class action, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=9648 or call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com
for information on the class action.
What is this about: On October 22, 2024, the Securities and
Exchange Commission announced that it had charged four companies,
including Unisys, with "making materially misleading disclosures
regarding cybersecurity risks and intrusions." Further, the SEC
also charged Unisys with disclosure controls and procedures
violations.
On this news, Unisys stock fell 8.6% on October 22, 2024.
Why Rosen Law: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel
with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms
issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or
any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not
actually litigate securities class actions. Be wise in selecting
counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the
globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved the
largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese
Company at the time. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS
Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class
action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4
each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of
dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438
million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was
named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's
attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.
Contact Information:
Laurence Rosen, Esq.
Phillip Kim, Esq.
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Tel: (212) 686-1060
Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
Fax: (212) 202-3827
case@rosenlegal.com
www.rosenlegal.com [GN]
UNITED STATES: Cortez Seeks Damages for Breach of Contract
----------------------------------------------------------
DOUGLAS CORTEZ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant, Case
No. 2:24-cv-07532 (E.D.N.Y., October 29, 2024) is a class action
brought by the Plaintiff, one of the many individuals who posted a
bond with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and whose
bond experienced a cancellation event under the terms of the bond
contract.
When noncitizens facing the possibility of removal are detained by
ICE, they may be released from custody pending removal proceedings
if they are not a flight risk or a danger to the community. They do
so by posting a bond, which is designed to ensure that they show up
when requested. This bond is typically thousands of dollars and, in
most cases, is posted in cash or its equivalent by a friend or
family member. When this happens, the friend or family member --
known in legal parlance as the "cash obligor" -- forms a written
contract with ICE. The cash obligor agrees to pay the amount of the
bond, and the detained individual is then released from custody on
the condition that they appear when called upon. If that condition
is satisfied through the end of the individual's removal
proceedings, the bond is cancelled, and ICE must then return the
money to the obligor.
The complaint asserts that ICE has failed to live up to its end of
the bargain. Even though their bonds have all experienced a
"cancellation event," as defined in the contract -- for example,
the dismissal of the bonded individual's removal proceedings -- and
even though the bonds are thus supposed to be cancelled and
returned to them, ICE hasn't given them their money back. ICE
failed to fulfill its contractual duty to cancel bonds, to notify
obligors that their bonds have been cancelled, and, ultimately, to
pay obligors the money that they are owed. As a result, the federal
government has retained hundreds of millions of dollars to which it
is not entitled, says the suit.
On behalf of himself and a nationwide class of those similarly
situated, the Plaintiff asks the Court to determine that ICE has
breached its contracts with the plaintiff and the class and to
award them damages for the amounts owed.
United States of America -- through ICE, the Department of Homeland
Security, and the Department of the Treasury --administers the
immigration-bond system, enters into bond contracts with obligors,
collects and retains bond funds, and is responsible for returning
bond funds when required by law.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
F. Franklin Amanat, Esq.
MOTLEY RICE LLC
800 Third Avenue, Suite 2401
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (212) 577-0052
E-mail: famanat@motleyrice.com
- and -
William H. Narwold, Esq.
MOTLEY RICE LLC
One Corporate Center
20 Church Street, 17th Floor
Hartford, CT 06103
Telephone: (860) 882-1676
E-mail: bnarwold@motleyrice.com
- and -
Meghan S. B. Oliver, Esq.
Charlotte E. Loper, Esq.
Ranee Saunders, Esq.
MOTLEY RICE LLC
28 Bridgeside Blvd.
Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464
Telephone: (843) 216-9000
E-mail: moliver@motleyrice.com
cloper@motleyrice.com
rsaunders@motleyrice.com
- and -
Deepak Gupta, Esq.
Jonathan E. Taylor, Esq.
Thomas Scott-Railton, Esq.
GUPTA WESSLER LLP
2001 K Street NW
North Tower, Suite 850
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 888-1741
E-mail: deepak@guptawessler.com
jon@guptawessler.com
thomas@guptawessler.com
- and -
Peter L. Markowitz, Esq.
458 Hancock Street
Brooklyn, NY 11233
Telephone: (718) 877-8817
E-mail: markowitz.peter@gmail.com
- and -
Mauricio E. Noroña, Esq.
37-34 85th Street Apt. 1
Jackson Heights, NY 11372
Telephone: (347) 891-3548
E-mail: mauricioenorona@gmail.com
VANGUARD GROUP: Agrees to Settle Retirement Funds Suit for $40MM
----------------------------------------------------------------
Reuters reports that Vanguard Group, the largest U.S. manager of
mutual fund assets, agreed to pay $40 million to settle a lawsuit
claiming it stuck ordinary investors in its popular target-date
retirement funds with surprisingly large tax bills.
A preliminary settlement of the proposed class action was filed on
Wednesday, November 6, in Philadelphia federal court, and requires
a judge's approval. Vanguard denied wrongdoing.
The lawsuit stemmed from Vanguard's December 2020 decision to
reduce the minimum investment in lower-cost funds meant for
institutional clients to $5 million from $100 million.
Investors said this caused a "stampede" into the lower-cost funds,
forced higher-cost retail funds to sell assets to meet redemptions,
and saddled investors who did not qualify for the lower-cost funds
with large capital gains in their taxable brokerage accounts.
In one example, the Vanguard Target Retirement 2040 Fund threw off
an estimated 15.1% of its net asset value as capital gains in 2021,
up from 0.4% in 2020.
Vanguard's target-date funds contain mixes of stocks, bonds and
cash that are designed to become less risky as investors age, and
also be tax-efficient.
The Valley Forge, Pennsylvania-based company had $9.9 trillion of
assets under management as of Aug. 31.
"Vanguard is committed to supporting everyday investors and
retirement savers and is happy to have reached an agreement that
allows us to put this litigation behind us," Vanguard said in a
statement.
In July 2022, Vanguard agreed to pay $6.25 million to resolve
similar claims by Massachusetts Secretary of State William Galvin.
The investors' lawyers may seek up to $13.33 million for fees,
$985,000 for expenses and $240,000 for the 12 named plaintiffs,
leaving about $25.4 million for other investors.
The lawyers said the "best case" scenario for damages was $259.5
million, and the $40 million recovery was an "excellent result."
The case is In re Vanguard Chester Funds Litigation, U.S. District
Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, No. 22-00955. [GN]
VIVENDI TICKETING: Faces Schoen Suit Over Hidden Ticket Charges
---------------------------------------------------------------
JACOB SCHOEN, JONATHAN CHEN, GLENN ERWANN MILLON, and JENNIFER
REAM, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs v. VIVENDI TICKETING U.S. LLC D/B/A SEE TICKETS,
Defendant, Case No. 24STCV28855 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty.,
November 1, 2024) is a class action against the Defendant for
violations of California's Consumers Legal Remedy Act, False
Advertising Law, and California's Business and Professions Code.
The case arises from the Defendant's use of "bait-and-switch"
tactics to mislead consumers about the true price of the tickets it
sells on its website and lure them into paying higher prices than
they otherwise would. The Defendant unlawfully advertised and
displayed the price of its tickets on its website without including
all mandatory fees or charges that customers ultimately had to pay.
Instead, throughout the purchase process, the Defendant concealed
the amount of the mandatory fees. As a result, the Defendant misled
consumers into believing their tickets would be significantly
cheaper than the final price in order to induce them to proceed
through the check-out flow and eventually pay higher prices for
tickets, says the suit.
Vivendi Ticketing U.S. LLC, doing business as See Tickets, is a
ticketing company doing business in California. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Frank S. Hedin, Esq.
HEDIN LLP
535 Mission Street, 14th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (305) 357-2107
Facsimile: (305) 200-8801
Email: fhedin@hedinllp.com
WECULTURE FOUNDERS: Faces Temoxtle Wage-and-Hour Suit in M.D. Fla.
------------------------------------------------------------------
ADAN TEMOXTLE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. WECULTURE FOUNDERS CLUB VALRICO LLC, A/K/A
VOODOO BREWING CO., and CHRISTOPHER J. CIULLA, individually,
Defendants, Case No. 8:24-cv-02563 (M.D. Fla., November 2, 2024) is
a class action against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime
and minimum wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants as a handyman from
approximately August 06, 2024, to September 28, 2024.
Weculture Founders Club Valrico LLC, also known as Voodoo Brewing
Co., is a brewery bar and restaurant located in Valrico, Florida.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
ZANDRO E. PALMA, PA.
9100 S. Dadeland Blvd., Suite 1500
Miami, FL 33156
Telephone: (305) 446-1500
Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
Email: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com
WELCOME WAGON: Faces Seifter Wage-and-Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y.
-----------------------------------------------------------
JAQUELINE SEIFTER and BARBARA ANTES, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. WELCOME WAGON, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 2:24-cv-07687 (E.D.N.Y., November 4, 2024) is a
class action against the Defendant for violations of the Fair Labor
Standards Act and the New York Labor Law including failure to pay
minimum wages, failure to pay overtime wages, failure to pay
spread-of-hours compensation, failure to provide wage notice, and
failure to provide accurate wage statements.
Plaintiffs Seifter and Antes were employed by the Defendant as
community marketing executives from on or around January 15, 2019,
through September 27, 2024, and from in or around May 2019, through
January 2022, respectively.
Welcome Wagon, LLC is a direct mail and digital marketing company,
with its principal executive office located in Coral Springs,
Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Brian S. Schaffer, Esq.
Frank J. Mazzaferro, Esq.
FITAPELLI & SCHAFFER, LLP
28 Liberty Street, 30th Floor
New York, NY 10005
Telephone: (212) 300-0375
- and -
Raymond Nardo, Esq.
RAYMOND NARDO, P.C.
129 Third Street
Mineola, NY 11501
Telephone: (516) 248-2121
WELLS FARGO BANK: Penuela Suit Transferred to S.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Andrew Penuela, Koushik Charan, Jill Molaris,
Maria Smythe, Jessica Willshire, Daymond Walton, and others
similarly situated v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A., Wells Fargo & CO.,
Case No. 4:24-cv-00766 was transferred from the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of California, to the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of California on Nov. 8, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:24-cv-02098-AJB-BJC to
the proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Product Liability.
Wells Fargo & Company -- http://www.wellsfargo.com/-- is an
American multinational financial services company with a
significant global presence.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Emily J. Kirk, Esq.
Richard D. McCune, Esq.
Steven A Haskins, Esq.
MCCUNE LAW GROUP, APC
3281 East Guasti Road, Suite 100
Ontario, CA 33311
Phone: (909) 557-1250
Fax: (909) 557-1275
Email: ejk@mccunewright.com
rdm@mccunewright.com
sah@mccunewright.com
- and -
Valerie Lauren Savran, Esq.
MCCUNE LAW GROUP MCCUNE WRIGHT AREVALO VERCOSKI KUSEL
WECK B
18565 Jamboree Road, Suite 550
Irvine, CA 92612
Phone: (909) 557-1250
Email: vls@mccunewright.com
WILTON REASSURANCE: Faces Ortiz-Diaz Suit Over Untimely Payments
----------------------------------------------------------------
ANTHONY ORTIZ-DIAZ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. WILTON REASSURANCE LIFE COMPANY OF NEW YORK, ALLSTATE
LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK n/k/a WILTON REASSURANCE LIFE
COMPANY OF NEW YORK, ALLSTATE SETTLEMENT CORPORATION n/k/a EVERLAKE
SETTLEMENT CORPORATION, ALLSTATE ASSIGNMENT COMPANY n/k/a EVERLAKE
ASSIGNMENT COMPANY, ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, and ALLSTATE LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANY n/k/a EVERLAKE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No.
3:24-cv-01767 (D. Conn., Nov. 6, 2024) sues the Defendants for
failing to make timely payments to the Plaintiff and the Class
members in accordance with the terms of their structured
settlements.
The lawsuit contends that the Defendants unilaterally changed the
payment date for structured settlement annuities company-wide,
intentionally delaying payment of all structured settlement annuity
obligations to Plaintiff and the Class. The Plaintiff's guaranteed
monthly payments have been delayed by approximately 30 days, and
all guaranteed monthly payments, lump sum payments, and other
payments due and owing to the Class under thousands of structured
settlements have been delayed, the suit claims.
Further, substantial sums due and owing to the Plaintiff and the
Class have been subject to Defendants' intentional delays, as the
annuity obligations under the structured settlements exceed $339
million annually and (on average) $28 million monthly. The
Defendants' conduct has breached and violated the terms of the
structured settlements with the Plaintiff and the Class members,
which provide that payments will be made on the due dates specified
in the structured settlement annuity contracts and that payment
dates may not be changed.
In addition, based on the failure to make timely payments,
Defendant Wilton Reassurance Life Company of New York has obtained
the benefit of the use of the funds due and owing to the Plaintiff
and the Class members and has unjustly benefitted- at the expense
of the Plaintiff and the Class members -through Wilton Reassurance
Life Company of New York's use of those funds, leveraging those
funds for investment income, the suit further alleges.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and the Class,
brings this action for damages, disgorgement, and all other
appropriate relief arising out of Defendants' unlawful conduct.
The Plaintiff was and is the payee (annuitant) under a structured
settlement, with Defendant Allstate Life Insurance Company of New
York as the annuity issuer and Allstate Settlement Corporation as
the assignment company, executed in March 2001.
Wilton Reassurance offers life insurance, reinsurance, and
annuities services. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Steven L. Bloch, Esq.
Jonathan Seredynski, Esq.
Krystyna Gancoss, Esq.
Kate Sayed, Esq.
SILVER GOLUB & TEITELL LLP
One Landmark Sq., 15th Fl.
Stamford, CT 06901
Telephone: (203) 325-4491
Facsimile: (203) 325-3769
E-mail: sbloch@sgtlaw.com
jseredynski@sgtlaw.com
kgancoss@sgtlaw.com
ksayed@sgtlaw.com
- and -
Gregory Kuczinski, Esq.
GREGORY KUCZINSKI, ESQ. P.C.
301 Old Tarrytown Road
White Plains, NY 10603
Telephone: (914) 245-7200
Facsimile: (914) 245-7208
E-mail: gkuczinski@kuczinskilaw.com
WORLD FINER: Robinson Sues Over Mislabeled Cracker Products
-----------------------------------------------------------
CAROL ROBINSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. WORLD FINER FOODS, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-07789-JAM (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 7, 2024) arises from the
Defendant's conduct of mislabeling its Wellington Whole Grain
Multigrain Cracker products.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's "Whole
Grain" branding and labeling of the Products is deceptive and
misleading because it conveys that the Products' main flour
ingredient is whole grain when, in fact, the main flour ingredient
is non-whole grain enriched wheat flour.
World Finer Foods, Inc. sells, markets, and distributes food
products. The Company offers cookies, bread, crackers, spices,
oils, sauces, soups, cereals, pickles, ingredients, pasta, and
curry powders. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph I. Marchese, Esq.
Israel Rosenberg, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor
New York, New York 10019
Telephone: (646) 837-7150
Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
Email: jmarchese@bursor.com
irosenberg@bursor.com
ZANDER GROUP: Plaintiff Seeks to Quash Subpoena to Produce Docs
---------------------------------------------------------------
IN the class action lawsuit captioned as WILLIAM H. "CHIP" JONES,
II, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v.
ZANDER GROUP HOLDINGS, INC., et al., Case No. 8:24-cv-00428 (D.
Neb., Nov. 4, 2024), the Plaintiff move the Court to quash the
Subpoena to Produce Documents issued by Zander Group that has been
served to Plaintiff's former legal representative McGrath North.
The Plaintiff initiated this class action ERISA lawsuit regarding
Defendants' handling of his Employee Stock Ownership Plan in the
Middle District of Tennessee, where nearly all the parties in this
matter are located. Specifically, the Second Amended Complaint
challenges the Defendants' act of distributing the contents of
Plaintiff and other ESOP participants' ESOP accounts on December
31, 2021.
The Defendants had sent a letter in November 2021 presenting this
distribution as an "option” that would expire if it not exercised
within 30 days."
Zander is an independent insurance agency headquartered in
Nashville, Tennessee.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Seamus T. Kelly, Esq.
David J. Goldman, Esq.
MUSIC CITY LAW, PLLC
1033 Demonbreun Street, Suite 300
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 200-0682
E-mail: seamus@musiccityfirm.com
david@musiccityfirm.co
The Defendants are represented by:
Lars C. Golumbic, Esq.
Sarah M. Adams, Esq.
Shaun A. Gates, Esq.
Lawrence A. Brett, Esq.
GROOM LAW GROUP, CHARTERED
1701 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Ste. 1200
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 861-6615
Facsimile: (202) 659-4503
E-mail: lgolumbic@groom.com
sadams@groom.com
sgates@groom.com
lbrett@groom.com
- and -
Mark E. Stamelos. Esq.
FORDHARRISON LLP
150 Third Ave South, Suite 2010
Nashville, Tennessee 37201
Telephone: (615) 574-6700
Facsimile: (615) 574-6701
E-mail: mstamelos@fordharrison.com
ZOOMCAR INDIA: Moran Sues Over Breach of Employment Agreement
-------------------------------------------------------------
GREGORY MORAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ZOOMCAR INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, ZOOMCAR
HOLDINGS, INC., STERNAEGIS VENTURES FUND I, LP, and AEGIS CAPITAL
CORPORATION, Defendants, Case No. N24C-11-005 PAW CCLD (Del.
Super., November 1, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants
for breach of employment agreement, breach of New York Labor Law,
unjust enrichment, tortious interference with employment agreement
and business relations, and declaratory judgment.
The case arises from the Defendants' breaches of employment
agreement and the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing
with the Plaintiff. Zoom India breached the employment agreement
by: (a) refusing to pay the Plaintiff $100,000 (which was due on
June 29, 2024); (b) refusing to pay the time off for vacation
valued at approximately $30,000 or the larger Owed Leave Encashment
valued at more than $42,000 (which was due by at least the second
business day after termination); (c) refusing to provide the
treatment owed concerning the 8 percent fully diluted equity
interest (including the automatic vesting of the fully diluted
interest the Plaintiff was promised), which is estimated to amount
to approximately 16 million shares; (d) refusing to pay the Owed
Gratuity valued at approximately $24,000 (which was due immediately
upon termination); (e) refusing to pay the Owed Severance above the
Owed Gratuity valued at approximately $72,000 (which was due
immediately upon termination); (f) and refusing to acknowledge and
apply accordingly the relinquishment of all Zoomcar Board seats as
a result of the termination of the Employment Agreement. As a
result, the Plaintiff suffered damages, says the suit.
Zoomcar India Private Limited is a provider of car sharing services
based in India.
Zoomcar Holdings, Inc. is a car sharing services firm headquartered
in California.
SternAegis Ventures Fund I, LP is a brokerage and investment
advisory products and services firm headquartered in New York, New
York.
Aegis Capital Corporation is an investment banking services firm
headquartered in New York, New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Timothy M. Holly, Esq.
CONNOLLY GALLAGHER LLP
1201 North Market Street, 20th Floor
Wilmington, DE 19801
Telephone: (302) 252-4217
Email: tholly@connollygallagher.com
- and -
Ralph N. Sianni, Esq.
ANDERSEN SLEATER SIANNI LLC
2 Mill Road, Suite 202
Wilmington, DE 19806
Telephone: (302) 510-8528
Email: rsianni@andersensleater.com
Asbestos Litigation
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Albany Int'l. Has 3,642 PI Claims as of Sept. 30
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Albany International Corp. is defending 3,642 claims as of
September 30, 2024, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company states, "Albany International Corp. is a defendant in
suits brought in various courts in the United States by plaintiffs
who allege that they have suffered personal injury as a result of
exposure to asbestos-containing paper machine clothing synthetic
dryer fabrics marketed during the period from 1967 to 1976 and used
in certain paper mills.
"We anticipate that additional claims will be filed against the
Company and related companies in the future but are unable to
predict the number and timing of such future claims. Due to the
fact that information sufficient to meaningfully estimate a range
of possible loss of a particular claim is typically not available
until late in the discovery process, we do not believe a meaningful
estimate can be made regarding the range of possible loss with
respect to pending or future claims and therefore are unable to
estimate a range of reasonably possible loss in excess of amounts
already accrued for pending or future claims.
"The Company's subsidiary, Brandon Drying Fabrics, Inc.
("Brandon"), is also a separate defendant in many of the asbestos
cases in which Albany is named as a defendant, despite never having
manufactured any fabrics containing asbestos. While Brandon was
defending against 7,676 claims as of September 30, 2024, only
twelve claims have been filed against Brandon since January 1,
2012, and only $15,000 in settlement costs have been incurred since
2001. Brandon was acquired by the Company in 1999 and has its own
insurance policies covering periods prior to 1999. Since 2004,
Brandon's insurance carriers have covered 100% of indemnification
and defense costs, subject to policy limits and a standard
reservation of rights."
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=1R31eM
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Carlisle Cos. Faces Products Liability Lawsuits
----------------------------------------------------------------
Over the years, Carlisle Companies Incorporated has been named as a
defendant, along with numerous other defendants, in lawsuits in
various courts in which plaintiffs have alleged injury due to
exposure to asbestos-containing friction products produced and sold
predominantly by its discontinued Motion Control business between
the late-1940s and the mid-1980s and roofing products produced and
sold by Henry Company LLC, which was acquired on September 1, 2021,
according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company has been subject to liabilities for indemnity and
defense costs associated with these lawsuits.
The Company has recorded a liability for estimated indemnity costs
associated with pending and future asbestos claims. As of September
30, 2024, the Company believes that its accrual for these costs is
not material to the Company's financial position, results of
operations, or operating cash flows.
The Company recognizes expenses for defense costs associated with
asbestos claims during the periods in which they are incurred.
Refer to the 2023 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the Company's
accounting policy related to litigation defense costs.
The Company currently maintains insurance coverage and is the
beneficiary of other arrangements that provide coverage with
respect to asbestos-related claims and associated defense costs.
The Company records the insurance coverage as a receivable in an
amount it reasonably estimates is probable of recovery for pending
and future asbestos-related indemnity claims. Since the Company's
insurance coverage contains various exclusions, limits of coverage
and self-insured retentions and may be subject to insurance
coverage disputes, the Company may incur expenses for indemnity and
defense costs and recognize income from insurance recoveries in
different periods, as such recoveries are recorded only if and when
it becomes probable that such costs will be covered by insurance.
The Company is also involved in various other legal actions and
proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. In the
opinion of management, the ultimate outcomes of such actions and
proceedings, either individually or in the aggregate, are not
expected to have a material adverse effect on the Company's
financial position, results of operations, or operating cash
flows.
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=JhWXrN
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Chubb Ltd. Increases A&E Reserves by $47M
----------------------------------------------------------
Chubb Limited, during the three and nine months ended September 30,
2024, has increased asbestos & environmental net loss reserves for
Brandywine managed operations by $47 million, according to the
Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=gYOy2n
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Colgate-Palmolive Defends 313 Cases at Sept. 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Colgate-Palmolive Company has been named as a defendant in civil
actions alleging that certain of its talcum powder products were
contaminated with asbestos and/or caused mesothelioma and other
cancers, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company states, "As of September 30, 2024, there were 313
individual cases pending against the Company in state and federal
courts throughout the United States, as compared to 293 cases as of
June 30, 2024 and 279 cases as of December 31, 2023. During the
three months ended September 30, 2024, 39 new cases were filed, 18
cases were resolved by voluntary dismissal or settlement and one
case was removed from the case count when it was established that
the claim does not relate to talcum powder. During the nine months
ended September 30, 2024, 105 new cases were filed and 70 cases
were resolved by voluntary dismissal, settlement or dismissal by
the court, and one case was removed from the case count as
described in the previous sentence. The value of the settlements in
the periods presented was not material, either individually or in
the aggregate, to such periods' results of operations. During the
three months ended March 31, 2024, one case resulted in a jury
verdict in favor of the Company after a trial. Subsequently, the
trial court granted plaintiffs' motion for a new trial in that
case. However, during the three months ended September 30, 2024, an
appellate court granted the Company's request to reinstate the
jury's verdict in favor of the Company. Plaintiffs are challenging
the ruling of the appellate court.
"A significant portion of the Company's costs incurred in defending
and resolving these claims has been, and the Company believes that
a portion of the costs will continue to be, covered by insurance
policies issued by several primary, excess and umbrella insurance
carriers, subject to deductibles, exclusions, retentions, policy
limits and insurance carrier insolvencies.
"While the Company and its legal counsel believe that these cases
are without merit and intend to challenge them vigorously, there
can be no assurances regarding the ultimate resolution of these
matters."
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=4fLOg9
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Columbus McKinnon Estimates $4.9MM Net Liability
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Like many industrial manufacturers, Columbus McKinnon Corporation
is involved in asbestos-related litigation, according to the
Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.
Based on actuarial information, the Company has estimated its net
asbestos-related aggregate liability including related legal costs
to range between $4,900,000 and $8,900,000, net of insurance
recoveries, using actuarial parameters of continued claims for a
period of 38 years from September 30, 2024. The Company has
estimated its asbestos-related aggregate liability that is probable
and estimable, net of insurance recoveries, in accordance with U.S.
generally accepted accounting principles approximates $6,063,000.
The Company has reflected the liability gross of insurance
recoveries of $7,090,000 as a liability in the Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheet as of September 30, 2024. The recorded
liability does not consider the impact of any potential favorable
federal legislation. This liability will fluctuate based on the
uncertainty in the number of future claims that will be filed and
the cost to resolve those claims, which may be influenced by a
number of factors, including the outcome of the ongoing broad-based
settlement negotiations, defensive strategies, and the cost to
resolve claims outside the broad-based settlement program. Of this
amount, management expects to incur asbestos liability payments of
approximately $2,700,000 over the next 12 months. Because payment
of the liability is likely to extend over many years, management
believes that the potential additional costs for claims will not
have a material effect on the financial condition of the Company or
its liquidity, although the effect of any future liabilities
recorded could be material to earnings in a future period.
A share of the Company's previously incurred asbestos-related
expenses and future asbestos-related expenses are covered by
pre-existing insurance policies. The Company had been engaged in a
legal action against the insurance carriers for those policies to
recover past expenses and future costs incurred. The Company came
to an agreement with the insurance carriers to settle its case
against them for recovery of a portion of past costs and future
costs for asbestos-related legal defense costs. The agreement was
finalized during the quarter ended September 30, 2020. The terms of
the settlement require the carriers to pay gross defense costs
prior to retro-premiums of 65% for future asbestos-related defense
costs subject to an annual cap of $1,650,000 for claims covered by
the settlement.
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=amdChK
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Flowserve Corp. Faces 667 New PI Lawsuits
----------------------------------------------------------
Flowserve Corporation, for the three months ended September 30,
2024, has received 667 new claims and resolved 704 claims,
according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company states, "We are a defendant in a substantial number of
lawsuits that seek to recover damages for personal injury allegedly
caused by exposure to asbestos-containing products manufactured
and/or distributed by our heritage companies in the past. We are a
defendant in a substantial number of lawsuits that seek to recover
damages for personal injury allegedly caused by exposure to
asbestos-containing products manufactured and/or distributed by our
heritage companies in the past. Typically, these lawsuits have been
brought against multiple defendants in state and federal courts.
While the overall number of outstanding asbestos-related claims in
which we or our predecessors have been named has generally declined
in recent years, the number of new claims may fluctuate or increase
between periods, and there can be no assurance that total
outstanding claims will continue to decline, or that the average
cost per claim to us will not further increase. Asbestos-containing
materials incorporated into any such products were encapsulated and
used as internal components of process equipment, and we do not
believe that significant emission of asbestos fibers occurred
during the use of this equipment."
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=XOESqP
ASBESTOS UPDATE: IDEX Corp. Defends PI Lawsuits
-----------------------------------------------
IDEX Corporation and six of its subsidiaries are presently named as
defendants in a number of lawsuits claiming various
asbestos-related personal injuries, allegedly as a result of
exposure to products manufactured with components that contained
asbestos, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company states, "These components were acquired from third
party suppliers and were not manufactured by the Company or any of
the defendant subsidiaries. To date, the majority of the Company's
settlements and legal costs, except for costs of coordination,
administration, insurance investigation and a portion of defense
costs, have been covered in full by insurance, subject to
applicable deductibles. However, the Company cannot predict whether
and to what extent insurance will be available to continue to cover
these settlements and legal costs, or how insurers may respond to
claims that are tendered to them. Asbestos-related claims have been
filed in jurisdictions throughout the United States and the United
Kingdom. Most of the claims resolved to date have been dismissed
without payment. The balance of the claims have been settled for
various immaterial amounts. Only one case has been tried, resulting
in a verdict for the Company's business unit. No provision has been
made in the financial statements of the Company, other than for
insurance deductibles in the ordinary course, and the Company does
not currently believe the asbestos-related claims will have a
material adverse effect on the Company's business, financial
position, results of operations or cash flows."
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=hQEvSG
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Minerals Tech Has 663 Exposure Cases as of Sept. 2
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Minerals Technologies Inc. and its subsidiaries are among numerous
defendants in a number of cases seeking damages for alleged
exposure to asbestos-contaminated talc products sold by its
subsidiary BMI Oldco Inc. (f/k/a Barretts Minerals Inc.), according
to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission.
The Company states, "As of September 29, 2024, we had 663 open
cases related to certain talc products previously sold by Oldco,
which is an increase in volume from previous years."
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=xxT38o
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Rogers Corp. Has 516 Exposure Claims Outstanding
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Rogers Corporation has recorded 516 asbestos claims outstanding for
the nine months ended September 30, 2024, according to the
Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.
The Company states, "We, like many other industrial companies, have
been named as a defendant in a number of lawsuits filed in courts
across the country by persons alleging personal injury from
exposure to products containing asbestos. We have never mined,
milled, manufactured or marketed asbestos; rather, we made and
provided to industrial users a limited number of products that
contained encapsulated asbestos, but we stopped manufacturing these
products in the late 1980s. Most of the claims filed against us
involve numerous defendants, sometimes as many as several hundred.
In virtually all of the cases against us, the plaintiffs are
seeking unspecified damages above a jurisdictional minimum against
multiple defendants who may have manufactured, sold or used
asbestos-containing products to which the plaintiffs were allegedly
exposed and from which they purportedly suffered injury. Most of
these cases are being litigated in Maryland, Illinois, Missouri and
New York; however, we are also defending cases in other states. We
continue to vigorously defend these cases, primarily on the basis
of the plaintiffs' inability to establish compensable loss as a
result of exposure to our products. The indemnity and defense costs
of our asbestos-related product liability litigation to date have
been substantially covered by insurance."
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5nkcwQ
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Trane Tech Defends Exposure Lawsuits
-----------------------------------------------------
Trane Technologies plc's wholly-owned subsidiaries and former
companies of the Company have been named as defendants in
asbestos-related lawsuits in state and federal courts, according to
the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission.
The vast majority of those claims were filed against predecessors
of Aldrich and Murray, indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries of Trane
Technologies plc, and generally allege injury caused by exposure to
asbestos contained in certain historical products sold by
predecessors of Aldrich or Murray, primarily pumps, boilers and
railroad brake shoes. None of the Company's existing or
previously-owned businesses were a producer or manufacturer of
asbestos.
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=qbglyv
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Carbide Has 4,407 Pending Claims at Sept. 30
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Union Carbide Corporation has reported 4,407 claims pending
individual claimants at September 30, 2024, according to the
Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.
The Corporation's total asbestos-related liability for pending and
future claims and defense and processing costs was $807 million at
September 30, 2024 ($867 million at December 31, 2023). At
September 30, 2024, approximately 23 percent of the recorded claim
liability related to pending claims and approximately 77 percent
related to future claims.
Each quarter, the Corporation reviews asbestos-related claims
filed, settled and dismissed, as well as average settlement and
resolution costs by disease category. The Corporation also
considers additional quantitative and qualitative factors such as
the nature of pending claims, trial experience of the Corporation
and other asbestos defendants, current spending for defense and
processing costs, significant appellate rulings and legislative
developments, trends in the tort system, and their respective
effects on expected future resolution costs. UCC management
considers these factors in conjunction with the most recent
actuarial study and determines whether a change in the estimate is
warranted. Based on the Corporation's review of 2024 activity, it
was determined that no adjustment to the accrual was required at
September 30, 2024.
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=O5R5J7
ASBESTOS UPDATE: WAG Defends Product Liability Lawsuits
-------------------------------------------------------
CarParts.com, Inc.'s wholly-owned subsidiary, Automotive Specialty
Accessories and Parts, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiary Whitney
Automotive Group, Inc. ("WAG"), are named defendants in several
lawsuits involving claims for damages caused by installation of
brakes during the late 1960's and early 1970's that contained
asbestos, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company states, "WAG marketed certain brakes, but did not
manufacture any brakes. WAG maintains liability insurance coverage
to protect its and the Company's assets from losses arising from
the litigation and coverage is provided on an occurrence rather
than a claims made basis, and the Company is not expected to incur
significant out-of-pocket costs in connection with this matter that
would be material to its consolidated financial statements."
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=hfEf5O
*********
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 ***