Mealey's Class Actions

  • February 21, 2018

    Uber Driver Class Certified In Suit Over ‘Upfront Pricing’

    SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge in an order filed Feb. 16 certified a class of drivers suing Uber Technologies Inc. and its subsidiary Rasier LLC (collectively, Uber) for changing the pricing policy in 2016 and keeping a larger percentage of each fare, allegedly violating its agreement with the drivers (Martin Dulberg, et al. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., et al., No. 17-850, N.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26222).

  • February 21, 2018

    Judge Finds Majority Of Claims Against Composite Deck Maker Are Untimely

    BOSTON — A federal judge in Massachusetts on Feb. 15 dismissed breach of implied warranty claims brought by three of four leading plaintiffs in a class action suit over allegedly faulty composite decking that prematurely swells and cracks, finding that the claims were untimely because they accrued at the time the plaintiffs discovered the defects (Anthony Pagliaroni, et al. v. Mastic Home Exteriors Inc., et al., No. 12-10164-DJC, D. Mass., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 250096).

  • February 21, 2018

    Interlocutory Appeal Denied In Stolen Data Suit Against Intuit

    SAN JOSE, Calif. — Plaintiffs alleging negligence by Intuit Inc. related to incidents of fraudulent tax return filings were denied the opportunity to pursue an interlocutory appeal of an order compelling arbitration on Feb. 16, when a California federal judge concluded that an appeal would not serve to advance resolution of the case (In re Intuit Data Litigation, No. 5:15-cv-01778, N.D. Calif.).

  • February 20, 2018

    Allergan Reports It Settled TNS Cosmeceuticals Case Ahead Of Class Motion

    SANTA ANA, Calif. — Allergan plc and subsidiary SkinMedica on Feb. 16 said they settled a purported class action lawsuit alleging that certain “cosmeceuticals” contain undeclared and unapproved human growth factors (Josette Ruhnke, et al. v. SkinMedica, Inc., et al., No. 14-420, C.D. Calif.).

  • February 20, 2018

    Supreme Court Declines To Consider Data Breach Article III Standing Appeal

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In its Feb. 20 order list, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition for certiorari by a health insurer that argued that the District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals did not apply the proper actual or imminent harm standing in determining class members’ standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution related to the exposure of their personally identifiable information (PII) in a 2014 data breach (CareFirst Inc., et al. v. Chantal Attias, et al., No. 17-641, U.S. Sup., 2018 U.S. LEXIS 1356).

  • February 20, 2018

    U.S. High Court Declines Appeal On FCC’s Opt-Out Notice For Solicited Faxes

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 20 denied a petition for writ of certiorari that was filed by corporations that were intervenors on the side of the Federal Communications Commission in proceedings below and that challenged a decision by a split District of Columbia Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel that held that the FCC’s 2006 Solicited Fax Rule was unlawful to the extent that it required opt-out notices on solicited faxes and vacated an FCC order filed in response to a request for a declaratory ruling filed by a generic drug company that was the defendant in a $150 million class complaint (Bais Yaakov of Spring Valley, et al. v. Anda, Inc., et al., No. 17-351, U.S. Sup.).

  • February 20, 2018

    Financial Institutions Defend Attorney Fees Award In Home Depot Data Breach Suit

    ATLANTA — In a Feb. 16 brief to the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, a group of financial institutions (FIs) that achieved a successful settlement of their claims related to the 2014 Home Depot Inc. data breach oppose the home improvement chain’s appeal of a subsequent $15.3 million attorney fees award, calling the amount reasonably calculated and in line with the efforts undertaken by class counsel (Northeastern Engineers Federal, et al. v. Home Depot Inc., et al., No. 17-14741, 11th Cir.).

  • February 20, 2018

    Supreme Court Won’t Hear Foot Locker Pension Plan Charges Appeal

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 20 denied a petition for writ of certiorari filed by Foot Locker Inc. asking the high court to decide whether a class of pension plan participants could be certified in a case alleging violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act when Foot Locker failed to disclose a temporary freezing of benefits after the Foot Locker Retirement Plan was transitioned to a cash-balance plan (Foot Locker, Inc., et al. v. Geoffrey Osberg, et al., No. 17-690, U.S. Sup.).

  • February 20, 2018

    U.S. High Court Reverses 6th Circuit Ruling On Retirees’ Lifetime Benefits

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on Feb. 20 issued a per curiam decision in an appeal over retiree’s health care benefits and reversed a ruling by a Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel majority for the retirees, referencing a dissenting opinion that called the decision “Yard-Man [UAW v. Yard-Man, Inc., 716 F.2d 1476 (6th Cir. 1983)] re-born, re-built, and re-purposed for new adventures” (CNH Industrial N.V., et al. v. Jack Reese, et al., No. 17-515, U.S. Sup.).

  • February 16, 2018

    Class: Life Insurer, Private Investment Firm Unlawfully Raised Prices In Policies

    NEW YORK — A life insurer and a private investment firm, which acquired the insurer, unlawfully increased the cost of premiums to recoup costs associated with the acquisition, among other reasons, plaintiffs allege in a Feb. 13 class action filed in a New York federal court (Derek Fan, et al. v. Phoenix Life Insurance Co., et al., No. 18-01288, S.D. N.Y.).

  • February 16, 2018

    Federal Judge Grants Class Certification In NYU Retirement Plan Dispute

    NEW YORK — A New York federal judge on Feb. 13 granted a motion for class certification in a lawsuit alleging that New York University (NYU) breached its duty of prudence under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act in its administration and management of its retirement plan (Dr. Alan Sacerdote, et al. v. New York University, et al., No. 16-6284, S.D. N.Y., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23540).

  • February 16, 2018

    2nd Circuit Denies Petition For Appeal Of Class Certification Grant

    NEW YORK — The Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Feb. 13 denied a retirement plan’s administrative and investment committees’ petition for permission to appeal the grant of class certification in a breach of fiduciary duty case in which the investors claim that the defendants selected company-affiliated mutual funds as plan investments rather than other better-performing mutual funds, finding that immediate appeal is unwarranted (Marya J. Leber v. Citigroup, Inc., et al., No. 07-9329, 2nd Cir.).

  • February 15, 2018

    Lead Plaintiffs Appointed In Securities Suit Against Semiconductor Developer

    BROOKLYN, N.Y. — Two shareholders have the largest financial interest in a securities class action lawsuit against a developer of 4G semiconductor solutions for wireless broadband applications and two of the company’s senior officers and have met federal requirements to serve as lead plaintiffs, a federal judge in New York ruled Feb. 6 in appointing the shareholders lead plaintiffs and approving their choice of counsel as co-lead counsel (In re Sequans Communications S.A. Securities Litigation, No. 17-4665, E.D. N.Y., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20665).

  • February 15, 2018

    Shareholders Found To Have Pleaded Falsity, Scienter In Stock-Drop Suit

    LOS ANGELES — Shareholders have pleaded the required falsity and scienter in claiming that a microturbine technology solutions provider and two of its senior officers concealed significant backlog issues with revenue it had received from its Russian distributor in violation of federal securities laws, a federal judge in California ruled Feb. 9 in denying a motion to dismiss (In re Capstone Turbine Corp. Securities Litigation, No. 15-8914, C.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22995).

  • February 15, 2018

    Woman Files Class Action Suit Over Sherwin-Williams’ Dock, Deck Resurfacer

    CHICAGO — Two dock and deck resurfacing products made by Sherwin-Williams Co. and its subsidiaries are allegedly defective because they prematurely peel, bubble and crack, allowing the elements to penetrate the surface, a woman says in a nationwide class action suit filed Feb. 13 in Illinois federal court (Regan Sluder, et al. v. Sherwin-Williams Co., et al., No. 18-1121, N.D. Ill.).

  • February 15, 2018

    5th Circuit Asked To Decide If Class Was Properly Certified In Securities Suit

    HOUSTON — Parties in a securities class action lawsuit against an appliance retailer and others recently asked the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to determine whether a federal district court properly considered price impact and whether the correct damages methodology was applied in considering the length of the class period (Laborers Pension Trust Fund — Detroit and Vicinity, et al. v. Conn’s Inc., et al., No. 17-20525, 5th Cir.).

  • February 15, 2018

    Privacy Violations, Lack Of Medical Care, Other Complaints Hit Courts

    Recent class action lawsuits filed in federal and state courts across the country include complaints alleging privacy violations, improper medical care for prisoners and violations of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act.

  • February 15, 2018

    Colorado Federal Judge Grants Class Certification In Au Pairs’ Wage Suit

    DENVER — A Colorado federal judge on Feb. 2 certified five of six classes and all 13 subclasses proposed by au pairs who are suing their employers alleging suppression of wages (Johana Paola Beltran, et al. v. InterExchange, Inc., et al., No. 14-3074, D. Colo., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23764).

  • February 15, 2018

    Class Suit Accusing Hobby Lobby Of Fake Discounts Survives Dismissal

    SAN DIEGO — A California federal judge on Feb. 8 denied Hobby Lobby Stores Inc.’s motion to dismiss a class complaint accusing the retailer of creating false sale prices by using fictitious “marked” prices on its products (Christina Chase, et al. v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., et al., No. 17-881, S.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21165).

  • February 15, 2018

    Objectors To 9th Circuit: Ford Transmission Settlement Doesn’t Benefit Class

    SAN FRANCISCO — A settlement by Ford Motor Co. that ended a class complaint accusing the automaker of fraudulently concealing and denying the existence of a transmission defect benefits only Ford, class counsel and the representative plaintiffs, objectors argue in an appellant brief filed Feb. 2 in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, challenging a district court’s approval of the settlement (Omar Vargas, et al. v. Ford Motor Company, Nos. 17-56745 and 17-56746, 9th Cir.).