Class Action Lawsuit and Litigation News

Political News

Trump picks new head of Federal Trade Commission

Andrew Ferguson has been a Republican member of the FTC since April 2024

Featured Political News photo

President-elect Donald Trump has chosen Andrew Ferguson, a Republican FTC commissioner, as the new chair of the Federal Trade Commission, replacing Lina Khan, who on Tuesday won a major victory when a federal judge blocked the Kroger-Albertsons merger.

Kahn took on numerous antitrust cases and, while Ferguson is not expected to be as aggressive, he is expected to continue targeting Big Tech monopolies. Cases against Google, Meta, Apple, and Amazon, initiated during Trump’...

Read article
Featured Political News photo

Latest Articles

  1. Facebook says it won’t run new political ads in the week before elections
  2. New York Attorney General files lawsuit to dissolve NRA
  3. Supreme Court rules rogue electors can be punished
  4. Supreme Court keeps CFPB in place but says President can fire its director at will
  5. Labeling false news stories could lead to more misinformation

Not sure how to choose?

Get expert buying tips about Class Action Lawsuit and Litigation News delivered to your inbox.

    By entering your email, you agree to sign up for consumer news, tips and giveaways from ConsumerAffairs. Unsubscribe at any time.

    Thanks for subscribing.

    You have successfully subscribed to our newsletter! Enjoy reading our tips and recommendations.

    Recent Articles

    Newest
    • Newest
    • Oldest
    Article Image

    Suit against major bottled water brand will go forward

    Plaintiffs claim Poland Spring is simply groundwater

    A federal court judge in Connecticut has ruled that a class action lawsuit against Nestle Waters can proceed.

    The ruling comes nearly a year after the court dismissed a nearly identical lawsuit, which claimed Nestle’s Poland Spring bottled water is merely groundwater, not spring water as the company claims. The suit, filed by a dozen plaintiffs who reside in eight different states, accuses Nestle of misleading consumers with deceptive claims.

    “Nothing in the court’s recent decision undermines our confidence in our overall legal position,” a spokesman for Nestle Waters told Fox News. “We will continue to defend our Poland Spring Brand vigorously against this meritless lawsuit.”

    The company says an independent investigation by a law firm confirmed that Poland Spring water meets all the Food and Drug Administration’s definitions of “spring water.” In the wake of the court’s latest ruling the company is doubling down on its position that its product is “100 percent natural spring water.”

    Previous suit was dismissed

    Nestle thought it had put this matter to rest last May. At that time the same federal judge in Connecticut, where the company is based, dismissed a similar suit filed by 11 plaintiffs.

    The court dismissed the complaint after reviewing the results of an independent investigation into whether Poland Spring meets the requirements of the federal spring water standard.

    At that time the company released a statement from former U.S. Senator George Mitchell (D-Me.), chairman emeritus of the law firm of DLA Piper, saying Poland Spring brand water sources “satisfy the requirements of the federal spring water identity standard, and as a result, the use of the term ‘spring water’ on Poland Spring labels is both accurate and appropriate.”

    Both cases hinge on regulations covering water products, which are specific. The standards include:

    • The water flows naturally to the surface of the earth    

    • The water is collected only at the spring or through a borehole tapping the underground formation feeding the spring

    • A natural force causes the water to flow to the surface through a natural orifice

    • The location of the spring is identified    

    • Water collected with the use of an external force shall be from the same underground stratum as the spring, as shown by a measurable hydraulic connection using a hydrogeologically valid method between the borehole and the natural spring, and shall have all the physical properties, before treatment, and be of the same composition and quality, as the water that flows naturally to the surface of the earth.

    The plaintiffs in the latest lawsuit claim the company’s marketing is deceptive, alleging that Poland Spring water comes from “phony man-made wells."

    A federal court judge in Connecticut has ruled that a class action lawsuit against Nestle Waters can proceed.The ruling comes nearly a year after the c...

    Article Image

    Facebook facing charges of housing discrimination in ad practices

    HUD has accused the company of violating the Fair Housing Act

    The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) on Thursday announced that it’s charging Facebook with “discrimination” in its advertising practices for housing.

    In a complaint, HUD accused the company of violating the Fair Housing Act by "encouraging, enabling and causing" discrimination by excluding certain users from viewing housing ads on the platform.

    The group charges that Facebook willfully allowed advertisers to exclude people from seeing housing ads based on their neighborhood, interests, religion, race, and color, including whether they were “classified as parents, non-American-born, non-Christian, interested in accessibility, interested in Hispanic culture, or a wide variety of other interests that closely align with the Fair Housing Act’s protected classes.”

    “The Charge concludes that by grouping users who have similar attributes and behaviors (unrelated to housing) and presuming a shared interest or disinterest in housing-related advertisements, Facebook’s mechanisms function just like an advertiser who intentionally targets or excludes users based on their protected class,” HUD said in a statement.

    Accused of audience-targeting

    Last March, the National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA) and three of its member groups sued Facebook over the same issue. The suit alleged that Facebook allowed landlords and real estate brokers to exclude certain groups from viewing advertisements for housing, despite being warned that targeting housing ads in this manner may violate fair housing laws.

    In a statement, Facebook said it was “surprised” by HUD’s decision. A company spokesperson noted that Facebook has been “working with them to address their concerns and have taken significant steps to prevent ads discrimination.”

    “Last year we eliminated thousands of targeting options that could potentially be misused, and just last week we reached historic agreements with the National Fair Housing Alliance, ACLU, and others,” the spokesperson said.

    HUD is seeking unspecified damages for any person who was harmed by Facebook’s advertising policies, as well as “the maximum civil penalty” against the company for each violation of housing laws.

    “Facebook is discriminating against people based upon who they are and where they live,” HUD Secretary Ben Carson said in a statement. “Using a computer to limit a person’s housing choices can be just as discriminatory as slamming a door in someone’s face.”

    The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) on Thursday announced that it’s charging Facebook with “discrimination” in its advertising pract...

    Article Image

    Johnson & Johnson subpoenaed by federal agencies over baby powder litigation​

    The pharmaceutical company has been asked to provide documents related to the safety of its baby product line

    Johnson & Johnson disclosed in its annual report on Wednesday that it received subpoenas from two federal agencies related to litigation involving its baby powder line.

    The Securities and Exchange Commission and Department of Justice have requested that the pharmaceutical giant produce documents that shed light on the safety of its baby powder products.

    The inquiries came in response to a Reuters report from December about product liability lawsuits against the company.

    Internal documents obtained by Reuters revealed that Johnson & Johnson had been aware since the 1970s that its talc and powder products occasionally tested positive for traces of asbestos -- a known carcinogen and lung irritant with no safe level of exposure. However, the company didn’t tell regulators or the public.

    J&J said the subpoenas “are related to news reports that included inaccurate statements and also withheld crucial information.”

    The company has denied the allegations presented in the Reuters report and argued that “decades of independent tests by regulators and the world’s leading labs prove Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder is safe and asbestos-free, and does not cause cancer.”

    Johnson & Johnson has been sued numerous times by consumers who claim they got cancer after using the company’s products. The company said it intends to "cooperate fully” with the latest federal inquiries about the safety of its talcum powder products and that it will "continue to defend J&J in the talc-related litigation.”

    Johnson & Johnson disclosed in its annual report on Wednesday that it received subpoenas from two federal agencies related to litigation involving its baby...

    Article Image

    Woman sues Cabela’s for a crossbow lesson that ended with weapon recoiling into her eye

    A Texas woman claims she was not given proper instructions before shooting a crossbow for the first time

    A Texas woman’s first attempt to shoot a crossbow went horribly wrong, according to a lawsuit she filed against the retail chain Cabela’s, where she had her botched lesson.

    Tonya Kuykendall says in her lawsuit that she visited Cabela’s, the hunting and fishing store owned by Bass Pro Shops, in 2016 and asked to test out a crossbow equipped with a scope.

    The employee at the Waco, TX location where she visited, identified in the suit only as “Austin,” took her to the store’s shooting range. Kuykendall says she told him that it would be her first lesson.

    “In the range, as Ms. Kuykendall shot the bow for the first time, the bow recoiled and the equipped scope hit her left eye, causing her to scream in pain,” says the lawsuit, filed in the 74th State District Court in Texas and obtained by the Waco Tribune-Herald newspaper.  

    The suit alleges that Austin ignored Kuykendall as she screamed in pain.

    “In response to Ms. Kuykendall’s screams, ‘Austin’ began to laugh and asked if Ms. Kuykendall would like to shoot the bow again,” it says.

    “Virtually no recoil”

    Kuykendall says the injury required serious medical attention. She received a black eye, she alleges, and later needed to visit the emergency room to undergo a brain MRI and neurological exams. In addition to the eye injury, she says she also sustained nausea, headaches, and blurry vision, all symptoms of a concussion.

    The lawsuit says that Cabela's employees did not provide proper training and failed to render medical aid after the accident. Store managers told the Tribune-Herald that they could not comment and deferred the paper to corporate headquarters.

    The Bass Pro media line has not yet returned messages left by ConsumerAffairs.

    Crossbows are often portrayed as the safer alternative to hunting with rifles. Recoil, or when a weapon is forced backward after firing off at a target, can potentially injure the shooter if they are not properly trained. But recoil is typically thought of something that only happens with certain firearms, not crossbows.

    An owners manual put out by Cabela’s for one crossbow product claims that hunters should use the scope without worrying at all about any recoil.

    “For optimum accuracy, follow through your shot by aiming and watching the arrow hit your target through your scope,” the owner’s manual says. “There is virtually no recoil in a crossbow, so relax and hold the crossbow comfortably.”

    A Texas woman’s first attempt to shoot a crossbow went horribly wrong, according to a lawsuit she filed against the retail chain Cabela’s, where she had he...

    Article Image

    Verizon blames employee error for firefighters' data interruption during California fires

    During California’s biggest wildfire on record, a fire department vehicle’s service was compromised

    When a fire department vehicle’s wireless service was interrupted in the midst of California’s biggest wildfire, the wireless provider -- Verizon -- pointed its fingers at a customer service error.

    In a court filing this week, the Santa Clara Fire Department said one of its crews had its service significantly affected as it was fighting a wildfire at the Mendocino Complex.

    “County Fire has experienced throttling by its ISP, Verizon,” Santa Clara County Fire Chief Anthony Bowden wrote in the filing. “This throttling has had a significant impact on our ability to provide emergency services. Verizon imposed these limitations despite being informed that throttling was actively impeding County Fire’s ability to provide crisis-response and essential emergency services.”

    Recent issues with Verizon

    The fire department paid for an unlimited plan with Verizon but allegedly experienced a great deal of throttling until the plan was upgraded.

    “The internet has become an essential tool in providing fire and emergency response, particularly for events like large fires which require the rapid deployment and organization of thousands of personnel and hundreds of fire engines, aircraft, and bulldozers,” Bowden wrote.

    Bowden noted that Verizon’s throttling affected “OES 5262” -- a control and command that aids in tracking and deploying resources for firefighters wherever the need is greatest around the state and country.

    “In the midst of our response to the Mendocino Complex Fire, County Fire discovered the data connection for OES 5262 was being throttled by Verizon, and data rates had been reduced to 1/200, or less, than the previous speeds,” Bowden wrote. “These reduced speeds severely interfered with OES 5262’s ability to function effectively.”

    After communicating with Verizon about the throttling, Bowden said the wireless provider’s representatives said the issue wouldn’t be resolved until the fire department switched to a new plan -- at double the cost.

    Verizon released a statement earlier this week, admitting to being at fault for throttling the services. It labeled the issue as a miscommunication.

    “Like all customers, fire departments choose service plans that are best for them. This customer purchased a government contract plan for a high-speed wireless data allotment set at a monthly cost. Under this plan, users get an unlimited amount of data but speeds are reduced when they exceed their allotment until the next billing cycle. Regardless of the plan emergency responders choose, we have a practice to remove data speed restrictions when contacted in emergency situations,” Verizon said.

    “We have done that many times, including for emergency personnel responding to these tragic fires. In this situation, we should have lifted the speed restriction when our customer reached out to us. This was a customer support mistake. We are reviewing the situation and we will fix any issues going forward.”

    Net neutrality

    Earlier this week, 22 state attorneys general filed a brief asking the appeals court to reinstate the net neutrality laws that were founded under the Obama administration. Bowden’s declaration was submitted as an addendum to the brief that was filed with the states, the District of Columbia, Santa Clara County, Santa Clara County Central Fire Protection District, and the California Public Utilities Commission.

    There was much speculation that Verizon’s service interference was a product of net neutrality regulations, as opposed to what they are calling a customer service error. The beginnings of Verizon’s service throttling was documented in fire department emails on June 29 -- just weeks after the repeal of net neutrality.

    All major carriers implemented some form of network throttling -- even when net neutrality laws were in place -- when customers went over their data threshold on unlimited plans. While such instances were limited to times of network congestion, the Santa Clara Fire Department reported throttling at all times once going over their allotted 25GB a month.

    When a fire department vehicle’s wireless service was interrupted in the midst of California’s biggest wildfire, the wireless provider -- Verizon -- pointe...

    Article Image

    Tesla sues former employee, claiming sabotage

    But the ex-employee says he was simply a whistleblower

    Tesla is suing a former employee it claims hacked company systems and revealed confidential information to outside sources. But the ex-employee, Martin Tripp, says he was simply a whistleblower who was alarmed at how CEO Elon Musk was running the company.

    Tesla has been beset by problems in recent months, and on Monday Musk sent an email to employees that appeared to pin some of the blame on an unnamed employee that the executive accused of sabotage. On Wednesday, Tesla filed suit against Tripp without saying whether he was the unnamed employee mentioned in the email.

    The suit accuses Tripp of writing software to hack into the company's system, transferring reams of data to “outside entities.” Among the information taken from the company, the suit alleges there were "dozens of confidential photographs and a video of Tesla's manufacturing systems."

    The suit further claims that the ex-employee wrote computer code that would send Tesla data to people outside the company, in violation of Tesla policy. Tripp is also accused of making false statements about Tesla to the media – in particular, statements about the condition of batteries in some Tesla Model 3s.

    Tripp denies

    In an interview with the Washington Post, Tripp denied that he tampered with Tesla computer systems but confirmed that he gave information to a reporter for Business Insider because he was seeing “some really scary things” going on at Tesla.

    Tripp said he told reporters that he saw “dangerously punctured batteries” being installed in Model 3s. Tesla has denied that charge.

    The Business Insider article using Tripp as a source cast the company in an unflattering light, claiming it was using “an insane amount” of raw materials to make the Model 3, and still couldn't get it right.

    The article claimed internal company documents it received showed that as much as 40 percent of the raw materials going into batteries and driving units had to be discarded or reworked before going to the company's assembly plant.

    At the time, Tesla told the publication that a higher-than-normal scrap rate is to be expected in early stages of the production process. Tesla has struggled to meet production goals for the Model 3, a car it introduced in 2017, requiring customers to place a $1,000 deposit with their order.

    Revenge?

    Tesla's suit against Tripp claims a revenge motivation. It said the former employee became a problem early in his tenure with the company.

    “Within a few months of Tripp joining Tesla, his managers identified Tripp as having problems with job performance and at times being disruptive and combative with his colleagues,” the suit alleges.

    As a result, Tesla says Tripp was reassigned to a new role last month, after which he expressed anger at the company's action.

    Tesla is suing a former employee it claims hacked company systems and revealed confidential information to outside sources. But the ex-employee, Martin Tri...

    Article Image

    Claim that Roundup caused man's cancer goes to trial in California

    The dying plaintiff is suing Monsanto, the company that makes it

    A trial is getting underway in California today in which a consumer who used Monsanto's weedkiller Roundup claims the product caused his cancer.

    Forty-six year-old Dewayne Johnson is the first of hundreds of plaintiffs against the chemical giant to have his case heard in court. Johnson worked as a school groundskeeper and, during the course of his job, says he regularly used Roundup to keep grass and weeds under control.

    Johnson's case was bumped to the top of the heap after his attorney informed the court that his client was near death. Under California law, dying patients have the right to an expedited court hearing.

    The issue in the case is whether Roundup causes cancer, and if so, whether Monsanto adequately warned consumers. Monsanto has vigorously argued that its product does not cause cancer.

    World Health Organization has doubts

    The World Health Organization (WHO) isn't so sure. Three years ago it found that the main ingredient in Roundup, an herbicide called glyphosate, is "probably carcinogenic to humans."

    A year ago the state of California officially classified glyphosate as a chemical known to cause cancer under the state's Proposition 65. That law requires Roundup sold in California to carrying a warning label to that effect.

    Monsanto sought to block the move, calling it "unwarranted on the basis of science and the law," but a court dismissed the company's challenge.

    Environmentalists have put Roundup under the microscope since the WHO finding in 2015. The Environmental Working Group (EWG) argued the state of California should have set much lower exposure limits than those that were finally adopted.

    Shorter pregnancies

    Earlier this year, a peer-reviewed study found that women in agriculture-intensive areas of Indiana tended to have shorter pregnancies if they had been regularly exposed to glyphosate, which is used in agriculture as well as to control weeds in suburban lawns.

    “Glyphosate is the most heavily used herbicide worldwide but the extent of exposure in human pregnancy remains unknown,” researchers from Indiana University wrote in the journal Environmental Health.

    For its part, Monsanto argues that its product has undergone rigorous testing and is the subject of more than 800 studies that have established its safety.

    "We have empathy for anyone suffering from cancer, but the scientific evidence clearly shows that glyphosate was not the cause," said Scott Partridge, Monsanto's vice president of strategy, in a statement to the media. "We look forward to presenting this evidence to the court."

    A trial is getting underway in California today in which a consumer who used Monsanto's weedkiller Roundup claims the product caused his cancer.Forty-s...