Case Summaries
Class Actions
[08/19]
Fellner v. Tri-Union Seafoods, L.L.C. In a class-action suit alleging injury caused by methylmercury and other harmful compounds in defendant's canned tuna products, grant of a motion to dismiss is reversed and remanded where: 1) the FDA had not enacted a pervasive regulatory scheme regarding mercury in tuna that would preempt plaintiff's state-law claims; 2) the FDA's decision not to require warning labels on tuna was not a conclusive determination preempting a state failure-to-warn claim; and 3) the FDA had not expressly rejected mercury warnings as misbranding under federal law.
[08/19]
In Re: Nortel Networks Corp. Securities Litig. In a matter involving attorneys' fees following settlement of a private securities class action, judgment awarding 3% of the class's recovery to class counsel rather than the requested 8.5% is affirmed where: 1) appellant has waived its argument that the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act altered the fee-award scheme for cases covered by the Act by failing to present this argument to the district court; and 2) the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding a reasonable fee under established precedent.
[08/14]
Abner v. Kansas City S. Ry. Co. In employees' race discrimination suit, award of plaintiffs' attorney's fees and costs for an initial trial which ended in a hung jury is affirmed where a court may award reasonable fees, including those incurred in a first, inconclusive trial, and in doing so may: 1) cut out fees charged for work on unsuccessful claims and any other unreasonable work; and 2) look to the ultimate result of the case, especially as to the significant issues litigated, and the overall relief obtained.
[08/14]
Gene & Gene LLC v. Biopay LLC Order certifying a class of plaintiffs who alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), 47 U.S.C. section 227, specifically unsolicited advertisements sent from one fax machine to another, is reversed where: 1) there was subject-matter jurisdiction over the case under the Class Action Fairness Act; and 2) plaintiffs had failed to advance any viable theory employing generalized, class-wide proof concerning the issue of lack of consent.
[08/14]
Alch v. Time Warner Entertainment Co. In a class action suit against studios, networks, production companies, and talent agencies asserting an industry-wide pattern and practice of age discrimination, writ petition by television writers to allow access to certain data on Writers Guild members is granted where trial court acted beyond its discretion when it sustained all objections of third parties to the disclosure of subpoenaed information on privacy grounds.
More...
Consumer Protection
[08/18]
Yabsley v. Cingular Wireless, LLC In a claim that defendant-Cingular engaged in unfair competition in violation of Business and Professions Code section 17200 and misleading advertising by failing to inform consumer that a tax would be imposed on the full price of the cellular phone, judgment in favor of defendant is affirmed where: 1) when specific legislation provides a safe harbor, plaintiffs may not use the general unfair competition law to assault that harbor; 2) a sales invoice Cingular gave to plaintiff stated the amount of the sales tax imposed on the sale and gave plaintiff notice of the amount of sales tax that would imposed; and 3) plaintiff had the right to refuse to enter into the contract for the price stated.
[08/18]
Jerman v. Carlisle, McNellie, Rini, Kramer & Ulrich LPA The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act's (FDCPA) bona fide error defense applies to mistakes of law, and is not limited to procedural or clerical errors. In an action claiming law firm and one of its attorneys violated the FDCPA when they used allegedly deceptive forms to notify her of a foreclosure on her home, summary judgment for defendants is affirmed where: 1) although defendants violated the FDCPA by instructing plaintiff that she had to dispute the debt in writing; nevertheless, 2) defendants qualified for the FDCPA bona fide error defense.
[08/14]
Gene & Gene LLC v. Biopay LLC Order certifying a class of plaintiffs who alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), 47 U.S.C. section 227, specifically unsolicited advertisements sent from one fax machine to another, is reversed where: 1) there was subject-matter jurisdiction over the case under the Class Action Fairness Act; and 2) plaintiffs had failed to advance any viable theory employing generalized, class-wide proof concerning the issue of lack of consent.
[08/07]
Peck v. Cingular Wireless, LLC In a class action lawsuit brought by a former employee against Cingular claiming, inter alia, it violated state law by passing a business and occupation tax (B&O tax) on to consumers in the form of a line item charge, dismissal of the suit is vacated where, contrary to the ruling below, there was no federal preemption of plaintiff's state law claims.
[07/23]
Thompson v. Toll Dublin, LLC In a matter involving various fraud-related claims arising from the purchase of condominiums built and/or sold by defendants, denial of defendants' petition to compel arbitration and stay proceedings is affirmed where: 1) the arbitration agreement did not apply to plaintiffs' fraud-related claims; and 2) the arbitration provisions were, in any event, unconscionable and therefore unenforceable.
More...
Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site. AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.
|