Tag: California labor law

Week Adjourned: 4.12.13 – Apple, Skechers, Path, Fisker

This week, the top class actions in the news are Apple, Skechers, Path and Fisker. Week Adjourned is your weekly wrap of class action lawsuits and settlements for the week ending April 12, 2013.

Week Adjourned Apple Fisker Path SkechersTop Class Action Lawsuits

No, the Path to Profit is not through Spam…as Path social media can now attest to. The mobile social network got hit with a potential class-action lawsuit this week for allegedly sending unsolicited text ads to people’s cell phones, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).

Filed in Illinois, by Kevin Sterk, the Path lawsuit alleges that Sterk received an unsolicited SMS message in March from Path. The message stated that someone else wanted to show Sterk photos on the service, and contained a link to a site where he could register to join. Sterk claims he never authorized Path to contact him via SMS. Further, the lawsuit alleges the company has sent similar text messages to “thousands” of other cell phone users.

“By making these unauthorized text message calls, [Path] has caused consumers actual harm, not only because consumers were subjected to the aggravation that necessarily accompanies the receipt of unauthorized text message calls, but also because consumers frequently have to pay their cell phone service providers for the receipt of such unauthorized text message calls,” the TCPA lawsuit states.

The Path class action lawsuit contends that these unsolicited messages violate the TCPA, which prohibits companies from using automated dialing services to send SMS messages without the recipients’ consent. The law provides for damages of $500 per incident. Sterk, who is seeking class-action status, is asking for monetary damages and an order prohibiting Path from sending unsolicited text messages.

I wish someone would come up with an app that would enable the average Joe to spam the spammers. Now, that could be fun!

Forewarned isn’t Forearmed at Fisker? The folks at Fisker are facing an employment class action lawsuit filed over allegations it failed to provide 60 days notice to employees who were part of recent mass layoffs. Those layoffs are allegedly in violation of US and California labor laws.

FYI—the US Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act, a federal law, stipulates that companies with over 100 employees must provide 60 days notice prior to laying off their employees. There is also a similar requirement in place under California state law.

The employment lawsuit against Fisker alleges the company failed to pay the employees their 60 days pay and benefits that they would have been received had they been provided their duly entitled 60-day notice. Further, the lawsuit claims Fisker failed to notify California’s state Employment Development Department of its layoff plans, as well as the local workforce investment board, as well as the top elected officials in Anaheim and Orange County.

Top Settlements

A bit Sketchy on Skechers? Well, it’s official, but not approved. Confused? Don’t be. Last September we reported that Skechers has agreed to a preliminary $40 million settlement of a consumer fraud class action brought by disgruntled customers who claim the company misrepresented the benefits of the “toning shoes.”

Entitled Grabowski v. Skechers U.S.A., Inc., No. 3:12-cv-00204 (W.D. Ky.), the lawsuit concerns claims that Skechers violated certain state laws and consumer protection statutes in connection with the marketing and sale of its toning shoes. Not surprisingly, Skechers denies those allegations.

It looks as if final approval may be at hand, as the fairness hearing was scheduled for mid-March 2013. This matters to you purchased eligible Skechers toning shoes from August 1, 2008, up to and including August 13, 2012 in the United States.

To find out more information and to download claims forms, visit: http://www.skecherssettlement.com/

Bad Apples, eh? This one is all over the wires today…Apple—the faltering god of all things techno—has reportedly agreed to a $53 million settlement in the class action lawsuit pending over alleged defective iPhones and iPod Touch.

The unfair business practices class action was originally filed against Apple in 2010, and centered around claims that the company failed to honor its warranty obligations by fixing or replacing defective devices.

According to a report by CNET, thousands of owners of the original iPhone, iPhone 3G, iPhone 3GS, or the first three generations of the iPod Touch who were unsuccessful in getting Apple to honor its warranty related to repairs and replacements, can submit claims in the suit. These devices carried one-year standard and two-year extended warranties.

The settlement has yet to be approved, and full details have not been made public. Wired is reporting that depending on how many people submit claims, individual payouts could be approximately $200. Stay tuned for more on this one.

Ok—that’s a wrap. See you at that bar…

Week Adjourned: 7.3.09

clear-air-security-copy1Top Class Actions

Whiz-through security fizzes out? As if air travel wasn’t fraught with enough obstacles, delays, and frustrations frequent flyers last Monday found themselves SOL at Clear Airport Security Kiosks across the country. The problem? They’d closed their doors, gone out of business, shut down. See ya bye.

Clear operated the Registered Traveler program in 20 airports, serving a reported 260,000 customers. The company pre-screened frequent fliers taking fingerprints, iris scans and credit information, which it then gave to the US Transportation Security Administration, in order to fast track people through the security line-ups.

So, Verified Identity Pass, the parent company of airport security provider Clear, was hit with a class action lawsuit over reimbursement of its US$199 annual fee, by one very disgruntled customer. Continue reading “Week Adjourned: 7.3.09”

Week Adjourned: 5.15.09

Top Class Actions: The Week of the Biggies

Hotel Costco: You can clock in, but you can never leave? It appears to have been another busy week in law firms and courthouses across North America. Let’s start with Costco—last week Costco was in the news for having settled an unfair business practices class action and this week they’re in the news for “falsely imprisoning” employees in its California warehouses. Whaaat?

When I first read this my mind reeled, “what new business venture is this?”

Turns out it’s yet another unpaid overtime and wages class action centered in California. What is it about California?  (I’m referring to the endless labor law violations).

The class action centers on employees who were and are forced to remain in the warehouses after closing while store managers make goods secure and lock up. This has been going on for years, apparently. But now there is a lawsuit, of course, and the lawyers are seeking US $50 million in damages.

O Canada!—who was standing on guard at Guidant? Across the border in Canada, not a land well-known for class action lawsuits—something large is taking place. Earlier this month a national class action was certified against Guidant Corp, alleging that the company knowingly sold defective pacemakers. The class so far represents more than 28,000 people, and the lawyers are seeking CD$525 million in damages.

Highway Robbery? And a class action that’s been getting a lot of media this week is the Massachusetts Turnpike lawsuit, whose plaintiffs are being represented by a lawyer made famous in the 1998 film “A Civil Action“, Jan R. Schlichtmann.

Continue reading “Week Adjourned: 5.15.09”

Week Adjourned: 5.8.09

Top Class Actions: Hydroxycut, 3M

A Body Image to Die For? Last week we mentioned the Hydroxycut nightmare – people suffering permanent liver damage from using the product. Worse, so far one death has been associated with the use of this popular diet product. Sure enough, the class action lawsuits have started, filed in both the US and Canada by separate entities—this issue will be one to watch. Why? Because while drugs are very tightly regulated, over the counter supplements are not—the FDA in fact has very little control. Maybe these lawsuits will help change that. 

Surprise Retirement Parties at 3M. Seems 3M’s been planning some retirements that were real surprises—even to those retiring. It’s just been slapped with a class action alleging violations of the Age Discrimination and Employment Act (ADEA). This isn’t the first time 3M has been sued for unfair employment practices. However the suit centers on the allegation that “3M fires or forces these older employees into retirement or resignation. And, in an effort to protect itself, the company has forced departing employees to sign releases that misrepresent their rights and fail to give them required information necessary to determine whether they have been the victims of age discrimination.”

Nice.

The complaint was filed in California, a state that sees more than its fair share, if there is such a thing, of employment law violations, including unpaid overtime for IT personnel, test engineers and quality assurance engineers.

Top Settlements: Aerotek, Costco, Wal-Mart, and Anna Mae Ahern

“Hasta la vista baby.”  This week saw the ultimate pay day for disgruntled employees at Aerotek, as they announced the settlement of their employment class action for $1.25 million. This case involved more than 1,300 employees, past and present, who claimed that Aerotek had not reimbursed them for accrued leave when they were let go. That’s pretty good closure.

Big-Box Discounters…Big-Time Losers. A couple of big retailers were also in the news this week – Costco and Wal-Mart. Costco has agreed to provide up to 3 months free membership for people who had their renewed memberships unfairly backdated to the membership expiration date.

And remember that truly “Black Friday” last year – when a temporary clerk was trampled to death in a New York Wal-Mart when it opened its doors for the “sale event of the year”? Well, in order to avoid criminal charges, the retail giant has pledged $2 million to improve safety at its 92 outlets in the state. And it couldn’t have done this without the threat of criminal charges?

Talk about Betting the Farm. A pretty neat piece of justice took place this week.  A 101 year old lady who just happens to live on a 93-acre golf course in a Chicago suburb will receive $25 million for her property—at least that’s what the jury said the developer must pay if he wants the land. Anna Mae Ahern was born on the property—her family owned it. Then in 1921 they converted it from a restaurant and farm to a golf course. She’s been living there her entire life. Needless to say it’s worth a pretty penny to property developers today. To her credit, Anna knew that and so did her lawyers, who are no doubt celebrating with her. Question is, where to now?

More to come next week. We’re off to the bar again (yeah, that one)…see you there!

Week Adjourned 5.1.09

It’s been a busy week…

Top Class-Actions: Chinese Drywall, Park West Gallery, Mercedes-Benz

Oh, if these walls could talk. Some good news for homeowners who have found themselves victims of Chinese drywall. The Chinese drywall fiasco is generating a lot of activity, including a class action lawsuit filed on April 24th, by a couple in Florida against Georgia-Pacific Gypsum, and 84 Lumber. The suit alleges the companies sold sulphur-contaminated drywall and timber. Ironically, the products were touted as being ‘green’. Continue reading “Week Adjourned 5.1.09”