Class Action Lawsuit and Litigation News
Choosing the right paint for your home doesn’t necessarily boil down to what you think looks best, but what is safest for you and your family. That’s something consumers should be reminded of thanks to a recent settlement reached by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).
The agency announced a settlement with four paint companies over alleged deceptive claims that their products contained no volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and were safe before and after application for ba...
Bank of America has agreed to pay $1.9 million to settle a civil lawsuit that alleged that it took too long to tell customers that their phone calls were being recorded over the past several years.
The complaint cited violations of section 632 of the California Penal Code, which states that each party of a confidential conversation must be informed if the call is being recorded. The suit said that Bank of America failed to live up to this rule by not making “clear, consp...
Sort By
Last May, the state of New York sued Domino’s pizza for allegedly underpaying its workers by an estimated $565,000. New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman had said that the wage violations were the result of franchisees using a computer system called “PULSE,” which had been known to undercalculate gross wages and overtime pay.
“At some point, a company has to take responsibility for its actions and for its workers’ well-being. We’ve found rampant wage violations at ...
Washington Attorney General Bob Ferguson has asked a state court for a summary judgment against the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), as well as imposition of civil penalties.
The request stems from a lawsuit over the 2013 ballot initiative that attempted to require a special label on food products containing genetically modified organisms (GMO).
GMA, a Washington, DC-based food industry trade group, marshaled industry resources to oppose the measure, saying it wou...
Commercial drones are an ideal product for getting spectacular aerial views, but operators must be careful of where they fly them. That’s a lesson that SkyPan International is learning the hard way after reaching a settlement with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).
The aerial photography company has agreed to pay $200,000 for allegedly conducting 65 illegal flights above the cities of Chicago and New York City from 2012 to 2014. In a press announcement, the FAA s...
A Texas court has dismissed a $1 million lawsuit that a Dallas pet-sitting company filed against a couple who said the pet-sitters had overfed their goldfish.
It all began when fish owners Michelle and Robert Duchouquette returned home to Dallas after a brief vacation and found that the water in their fish bowl was cloudy, suggesting that their fish had been overfed by Prestigious Pets, the pet-sitting company. They posted a review on Yelp, complaining they had been unab...
Back in November, we reported that Tesla shareholders had greenlighted the acquisition of SolarCity. At the time, CEO Elon Musk promised that the deal would add $1 billion in revenue by 2017, even though some experts questioned the move based on SolarCity’s past earnings.
Now, two shareholders have filed a lawsuit against Musk and certain Tesla officials, stating that the financial statements they were given before the vote were false and misleading, according to Courtho...
One former employee and one current employee of Carl’s Jr. have filed a lawsuit against the chain’s parent company Carl Karcher Enterprises LLC (CKE), charging the company of wage suppression and unfair business practices, according to the Los Angeles Times.
The pair claims that CKE and its franchisees colluded with each other to bar employees in management positions from transferring between restaurants. This action, they say, effectively halts any attempt by workers wh...
An Illinois Supreme Court ruling upholding consumers’ right to file lawsuits in the courts despite contracts that purport to require binding arbitration is being seen as a victory for consumers. The ruling is likely to have a substantial impact on similar cases under consideration by federal and state courts in Ohio, New Mexico and a number of other states.
“This decision establishes a new rule in the giving consumers the right to file lawsuits when the arbitr...
New mothers are often highly concerned with what goes into their child's body, and buying organic products can be one way to help assuage that concern. But some companies’ baby and toddler-focused products may not be as organic as their labels claim.
Two infant formula makers are being accused of falsely labeling products as “organic.” The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) has filed suit against the Hain Celestial Group (owner of the Earth’s Best formula brand) and The Honest Co.
The companies are accused of labeling certain “organic” products that contain ingredients prohibited under the Organic Food Production Act of 1990 (OPPA).
Violates USDA standards
Eleven substances not deemed organic by federal law were found in The Honest Co.’s Premium Infant Formula. Over half of the 48 ingredients in Hain Celestial’s Earth’s Best Organic Infant Formula violate USDA Organic Standards. Non-organic ingredients were also found in other Earth’s Best products (including Organic Infant Formula, Organic Soy Infant Formula, Organic Sensitivity Infant Formula, and Organic Toddler Formula).
The OCA’s international director, Ronnie Cummins, says it’s an especially fitting time to call out the violation of USDA organic standards, as leaders of the organic industry are meeting this week at the Spring National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) to discuss organic standards.
“No one is more concerned about food labels and ingredients than new mothers responsible for feeding infants whose immune systems and brain development are so underdeveloped and vulnerable,” Cummins said in a statement, adding that mothers rely on truthful labeling.
The consumer advocacy group says the goal of the lawsuit is to force the two companies to either comply with USDA organic standards or stop calling their products “organic.”
Approved methods
What is and isn’t “organic” has been a contentious issue lately. According to the USDA, the labeling term should indicate that the food has been produced through approved methods.
The agency states that cultural, biological, and mechanical practices that “promote ecological balance and conserve biodiversity” should apply to a product before it’s labeled organic.
New mothers are often highly concerned with what goes into their child's body, and buying organic products can be one way to help assuage that concern. But some companies’ baby and toddler-focused products may not be as organic as their labels claim.
Two infant formula makers are being accused of falsely labeling products as “organic.” The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) has filed suit against the Hain Celestial Group (owner of the Earth’s Best formula brand) and The...
It looks like Tesla will be taking on the state of Michigan for the right to sell its cars to consumers there. The company has filed a lawsuit disputing a law that bars it from selling vehicles directly to Michigan consumers. The action comes less than a week after the automaker’s application for a Class A license was denied by state officials.
The law in question was created in 2014. It dictated that no automaker would be able to sell its cars in Michigan unless it did so through franchised dealerships in the state. It has been dubbed by some as the “anti-Tesla” law because it specifically mentions Tesla in one of its amendments about requiring a franchised dealership.
This is a big problem for Tesla since its company model is based off selling cars directly to consumers; it says that efforts to open dealerships in Michigan have been blocked by state officials.
Opposing forces
Tesla claims that the 2014 law is unconstitutional because it effectively gives automakers in the state a monopoly on car sales.
“As a result of this law, Michigan consumers are forced to accept reduced access to the products they want, less competition and higher prices,” said Tesla in a statement. It goes on to say that it will continue to “fight for the rights of Michigan consumers to be able to choose how they buy cars in Michigan.”
Tesla asserts that its efforts to make headway in the state have been rebuked by Michigan lawmakers at every turn. It stated that it had initially hoped to resolve the matter through the state’s legislature, but it was dismayed to learn that its case would not be submitted for review.
“Unfortunately, the local auto dealers and local manufacturers have made clear that they oppose any law that would allow Tesla to operate in Michigan. Given their position, the leadership of the Michigan legislature recently informed Tesla that it will not even hold a hearing to debate the issue,” the company said in a statement.
“As one leading legislator told Tesla: ‘The local auto dealers do not want you here. The local manufacturers do not want you here. So you’re not going to be here.’”
The company is seeking a jury trial and has named Michigan’s Secretary of State, Attorney General, and Governor as defendants, since each allegedly was involved in preventing Tesla from operating its own stores in the state.
It looks like Tesla will be taking on the state of Michigan for the right to sell its cars to consumers there. The company has filed a lawsuit disputing a law that bars it from selling vehicles directly to Michigan consumers. The action comes less than a week after the automaker’s application for a Class A license was denied by state officials.
The law in question was created in 2014. It dictated that no automaker would be able to sell its cars in Michigan unless it did ...
Consumers may remember back in 2014 when allegations surfaced that Best Buy was selling recalled products; charges for knowingly selling 16 recalled items between 2010 and 2015 ended up being leveled against the company by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC).
Selling these products stood directly in the face of federal law, which prohibits the sale, offer for sale, or distribution of recalled products. However, it seems that the company will finally settle acc...
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is still standing after a federal appeals court reduced the power of its director and ruled that the way it is structured is unconstitutional.
But the District of Columbia Circuit of the U.S. Court of Appeals denied a plaintiff's request to shut the agency down.
The ruling came in the appeal of a $109 million fine levied by CFPB against a New Jersey mortgage servicing company. The company appealed, claiming the agency, estab...
Chipotle has taken its fair share of lumps over the past year or so. After its catastrophic connection to an E. coli outbreak late last year, the chain was accused of wage theft in August by a thousands of employees who said they were required to stay and work after their shifts officially ended.
And now, another class action suit is being filed by consumers over false calorie information in the company’s menu labeling. Complainants say that the “Chorizo Burrito” menu ite...
Popular TV host Dr. Oz is no stranger to controversy. His health claims and advice have often been challenged, especially when it advocates one particular thing and suggests avoiding others.
Now, Dr. Mehmet Oz is a defendant in a suit brought by the North American Olive Oil Association (NAOOA) over an episode of The Dr. Oz Show that aired back in May.
In its complaint, the association claims Dr. Oz and his guest made “false and unsubstantiated claims” that 80% of the extr...
The state of Washington has taken aim at Monsanto – the agrochemical company that has caught the ire of millions over its use of biochemicals. According to a report from Consumerist, the state has sued the company because of its decades-long use of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
PCBs were banned in 1979 after they were found to be toxic, but Washington officials say Monsanto was aware of their harmful effects well before that time and continued producing them anyway, leading to the pollution of state waterways. Washington Governor Jay Inslee says the chemical is so pervasive that it can be found nearly everywhere.
“Monsanto is responsible for producing a chemical that is so widespread in our environment that it appears virtually everywhere we look — in our waterways, in people and in fish — at levels that can impact our health. It’s time to hold them accountable for doing their fair share as we clean up hundreds of contaminated sites and waterways around the state,” he said.
Prior knowledge of dangers
In its lawsuit, the state spells out the negative effects that PCBs can have on the environment and people. “In humans, PCB exposure is associated with cancer as well as serious non-cancer health effects, including injury to the immune system, reproductive system, nervous system, endocrine system and other health effects. In addition, PCBs harm populations of fish, birds and other animal life,” the complaint states.
It goes on to say that Monsanto was the sole manufacturer of PCBs for over 40 years, between 1935 and 1979. It alleges that the company knew the chemicals were toxic but “concealed these facts and continued producing PCBs until Congress enacted the Toxic Substances Control Act,” which banned PCB production in 1979.
As evidence, the state points to a 1967 company memo where company officials stated that there was “no practice course of action that can so effectively police the uses of the products to prevent environmental contamination.” Still, it continued to manufacture and push sales of the chemicals for more than a decade.
Profits over people
The suit cites another report that makes it clear that Monsanto put profits before the health of citizens. In a report to the Corporate Development Committee, Monsanto says that discontinuing production of Aroclor – the brand name under which PCBs were sold – was unacceptable, saying that “there is too much customer/market need and selfishly too much Monsanto profit to go out.
If successful in its suit, the state will look to claim hundreds of millions in damages. Damages will be assed based on the damage done to natural resources, the economic impact made on the state and its residents, and any future costs associated with the presence of PCBs.
---------------
Update: In a statement emailed to ConsumerAffairs, Scott S. Partridge -- Vice President of Global Strategy at Monsanto -- defended the company and addressed the lawsuit:
“This case is highly experimental because it seeks to target a product manufacturer for selling a lawful and useful chemical four to eight decades ago that was applied by the U.S. government, Washington State, local cities, and industries into many products to make them safer," he said.
"PCBs have not been produced in the U.S. for four decades, and Washington is now pursuing a case on a contingency fee basis that departs from settled law both in Washington and across the country. Most of the prior cases filed by the same contingency fee lawyers have been dismissed, and Monsanto believes this case similarly lacks merit and will defend itself vigorously."
The state of Washington has taken aim at Monsanto – the agrochemical company that has caught the ire of millions over its use of biochemicals. According to a report from Consumerist, the state has sued the company because of its decades-long use of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs).
PCBs were banned in 1979 after they were found to be toxic, but Washington officials say Monsanto was aware of their harmful effects well before that time and continued producing them anyway, ...
Just over a year ago, a South Dakota woman was awarded $55 million after a jury decided that the Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder she used for years caused her to develop ovarian cancer. It was the second major blow to the company in recent months, as another jury had awarded $72 million to the family of an Alabama woman who had died of cancer after regularly using Johnson & Johnson talcum powder.
Now, yet another lawsuit against the company has found success. On Thursday, ...