Week Adjourned: 5.18.12 – Tetley Tea, Skechers, Verizon
May 18th, 2012. By LucyC
Top Class Actions
Actually, this week it’s Top Consumer Fraud Class Actions—because false advertising class action lawsuits seem to be the theme right now…
What’s Brewing at Tetley Tea? Let’s take Tetley Tea as an example—as of this week, the Tetley Tea is facing a federal consumer fraud class action lawsuit over allegations it falsely advertises the health benefits of its tea products, specifically that they are an “excellent” or “natural” source of antioxidants.
The Tetley Tea lawsuit states, “Tetley utilizes improper antioxidant, nutrient content, and health claims that have been expressly condemned by the FDA in numerous enforcement actions and warning letters” to other companies that made similar antioxidant claims, such as Unilever’s Lipton Tea.
The lawsuit is brought on behalf of all consumers in California who purchased Tetley Tea’s Classic Blend Black Tea, British Blend Black Tea, Pure Green Tea, Iced Tea Blend Tea, and/or Iced Tea Mix Tea within the last four years.
The lawsuit is seeking damages, restitution and other bits and pieces, for alleged claims of unlawful, unfair and fraudulent business acts and practices; misleading and deceptive advertising; untrue advertising; and violation of the Magnuson-Moss Act and Beverly-Song Act. That’s some laundry list.
Top Settlements
Couple of big preliminary settlements on—you guessed it—consumer fraud/false advertising class action lawsuits to tell you about this week…
Skechers Sketchy Health Claims. This one, all over the media, implies that Skechers may be guilty of sketchy health claims. At least the FTC thinks so. But not the shoe manufacturer, of course. Nevertheless, Skechers USA has agreed to pay $45M to resolve allegations brought by the US and state governments that it deceived customers about the health benefits of its Shape-ups athletic shoes.
The allegations center on claims that the shoe manufacturer’s athletic toning shoes help people lose weight and strengthen their buttocks and legs. Skechers aren’t the first athletic shoe maker to face penalties for their advertising claims—Reebok also got hit and settled for $25 million, but hey, according to news reports, these shoes are big business. Skechers reportedly made $1.4 billion in 2009.
According to a statement by the US Federal Trade Commission, Skechers, based in Manhattan Beach, California, also made false claims in advertising for its Resistance Runner, Tone-ups and Toners shoes.
According to a report by Bloomberg, the ads for Skechers that were challenged by the FTC include one for Shape-ups that told consumers they could “get in shape without setting foot in a gym,” according to the statement. The FTC alleges the company made unsupported claims that the shoes would provide more weight loss and muscle toning than regular fitness shoes.
You may be a class member if you purchased eligible Skechers toning shoes since August 1, 2008, with limited exclusions. The Court has not yet ruled on whether the settlement should be preliminarily approved. The Court may not grant preliminary approval or may require certain changes to the proposed settlement.
If the Court grants preliminary approval of the proposed settlement, you will have rights which you may wish to exercise, including rights to opt-out of the settlement or object.
Under the terms of the preliminary settlement, Skechers has agreed to provide refunds to consumers who bought the following Eligible Shoes as new since August 1, 2008:
Skechers Shape-ups rocker bottom shoes
Skechers Resistance Runner rocker bottom shoes
Skechers Shape-ups Toners/Trainers
Skechers Tone-ups with podded outsoles
Skechers Tone-ups non-podded sandals
Skechers boots
Skechers clogs
Skechers trainers (Tone-ups, non-podded sole)
The total refund you can receive from the Skechers shape-ups settlement will depend on how many Eligible Shoes you purchased from August 1, 2008, onwards, as well as the total number of valid claim forms submitted by other Class Members.
Possible reimbursements could be:
$40 – $80 for Shape-ups;
$27 – $50 for podded sole shoes;
$20 – $40 for Tone-ups (non-podded sole); and
$42 – $80 for Resistance Runners
To find out more about the Skechers settlement, whether or not you could qualify as a class member, and to download forms, visit http://www.skecherssettlement.com.
Verizon Calling —Verizon Land Lines that is. A preliminary settlement has been reached in a consumer fraud class action pending against Verizon. This time, it’s not health claims that are the issue—but third-party charges.
If you were billed for third-party charges on your Verizon landline telephone bill, you may be entitled to a payment from this class action settlement, if the settlement is approved.
The Settlement will provide for payments to all class members who properly submit Claim Forms by November 15, 2012. The payments will be either $40 in the case of approved Flat Payment Claims or the full amount (i.e., 100%) of unauthorized Third-Party Charges you paid in the case of approved Full Payment Claims. Some class members may have a claim for less than $40. Class counsel contends that some class members may have a claim for hundreds of dollars, or more.
You must submit a claim form in order to qualify for payment. This is the only way to get a payment. You may submit a Flat Payment Claim for $40 or a Full Payment Claim for 100% of all unauthorized charges you paid. To file a claim, you must complete a Claim Form either online or download a Claim Form, print it out and mail it to the Settlement Administrator by November 15, 2012. You can find the claims forms by visiting www.verizonthirdpartybillingsettlement.com.
The Court in charge of this case has given its preliminary approval to the Settlement but still has to decide whether to give final approval to the Settlement. Payments will be made if the Court gives final approval to the Settlement and after appeals, if any, are resolved.
OKee dokee. Enough business as usual—it’s the weekend! See you at the bar—where the health benefits are obvious and require no advertising…
Bret Michaels Head Injury Lawsuit Settles
May 18th, 2012. By AbiK
Seems like ages ago now, but remember when Bret Michaels was all over the news after suffering that brain hemorrhage? Thankfully for him, his daughters and family, and Poison fans everywhere, he recovered—and we all got a glimpse of his ordeal when People magazine ran Michaels on its cover with the headline “I’m Lucky to be Alive”.
But while a hemorrhage can seemingly occur out of the blue, in Michaels case, there had been a head injury only the year before—in June, 2009. Michaels’ head injury occurred—rather publicly—during the 2009 Tony Awards, at which he and his band, Poison, were performing “Nothin’ But a Good Time”.
When the song was over, Michaels turned to leave the stage and that’s when a rather large piece of the set descended and appeared to hit Michaels in the head, knocking him down. He suffered a fractured nose and needed stitches in his lip.
Given the timing of the head injury, and then the brain hemorrhage less than a year later, Michaels filed a personal injury lawsuit in March, 2011 claiming the stage accident contributed to his life-threatening brain hemorrhage.
Both the Tony Awards and CBS were defendants in the lawsuit which alleged that the Tony Awards producers did not warn Michaels of a set change after his performance and CBS aired the accident thereby allowing it to be picked up by viewers who then made the accident go viral on sites like YouTube.
Needless to say, terms of the settlement—reached last week after a mediation session—are undisclosed. The head injury lawsuit did not specify the monetary damages being sought when Michaels filed it, however according to the Associated Press, Michaels did state that the injury hurt his ability to play at future shows.
Speaking of shows, now that Michaels is performing, fans can catch him on tour this summer–here’s list of Bret Michaels tour dates.
Asbestos News Roundup: 5.17.12 – Electrician Asbestos Risk
May 17th, 2012. By LucyC
A roundup of recent asbestos-related news and information that you should be aware of. An ongoing list of reported asbestos hot spots in the US from the Asbestos News Roundup archive appears on our asbestos map.
Electricians and Asbestos Exposure Risk
Electricians and electrical cable installers may not know it, but they are at risk for being exposed to asbestos through repair, demolition or installation work. This lethal, fibrous material was used in felted asbestos insulation or asbestos tape to insulate wiring. So working on old power lines, old wiring or breaker boxes would put electricians at risk for asbestos exposure. Older arc chutes also contain asbestos. It was used in circuit breakers, for example, before the mid-1980′s, when they were made of asbestos-containing plastic molding compound.
Recently, an asbestos lawsuit filed by six workers in Tennessee has made media headlines, because the workers were exposed to asbestos when dismantling outdated synchronous condensers, among other things.
Asbestos Lawsuits
Oak Ridge, TN: Six clean-up workers in Oak Ridge have filed an asbestos lawsuit against several government contractors alleging they were unknowingly exposed to asbestos and further they were unprotected when dealing with the lethal substance.
The lawsuit, filed May 5 in Roane County, seeks damages from the contractors who were involved in cleanup operations at the Department of Energy’s (DOE) K-25 plant in 2000-2001. Those contractors included BNFL Inc., now doing business as TSB FA Nuclear Services Inc., which headed a multiyear, $300 million DOE project that dismantled and decontaminated three uranium-enrichment facilities at the Oak Ridge site.
The six plaintiffs worked as independent contractors for R&R Electric Corp., a subcontractor that reportedly was involved in the demolition of “synchronous condensers” at the site. According to a report in the Knoxville News Sentinel, the plaintiffs claim they were told that the condensers did not contain asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls and other hazards, and that their requests for respirators and other protective equipment were refused by the contractor teams at the Oak Ridge. The workers said they were exposed at the site while cutting up the equipment with chop saws.
“The chop saws created thick clouds of fine dust and debris, which completely coated Plaintiffs’ bodies and clothing every day, and which they breathed continuously,” the lawsuit alleges.
The workers also allege that during their work at they were exposed to smoke from fires in 2000 when BNFL and another contractor, Coy Superior Inc., attempted to burn insulating material and wrapping off the large copper coils that had been removed from the condensers to salvage the copper.
“The coils were burned in open fires in the BNFL switchyard over a period of a week, creating huge plumes of smoke,” the lawsuit states. “On information and belief, the insulating material and wrapping contained significant quantities of ACM (asbestos-containing material).”
While contractors reportedly denied knowledge that the equipment contained asbestos, the lawsuit states that the Department of Energy had manuals confirming that the condensers did contain asbestos and that BNFL had access to these manuals.
The lawsuit is seeking unspecified compensation for pain and suffering, increased risk of cancer and other diseases. The plaintiffs are Christopher Todd Upton, Leslie Darnell Jones, Jeffery Lynn Keylon, Paul Steven Vance, James David Parten and Timothy Edward Robbins. (Knoxvillenewsentinal.com)
Lancaster County, NE: BNSF Railway is being sued by two former railroad employees who allege their asbestos-related lung disease resulted from asbestos exposure during their work with the railway.
In their lawsuit, William Schleicher of Lincoln and Frank Cox of Eagle Lake allege they were required to work around asbestos-containing materials and accuse the railroad of negligence and failing to provide them a safe place to work, as required by federal law.
Schleicher worked as a blacksmith and Cox as a boilermaker, and their main exposures were at the West O Street yards. Schleicher was in a reclamation plant that salvaged materials, and Cox was in a heating plant, according to their attorney. Schleicher started work in 1943 at age 16, and Cox in 1968, according to their attorney.(Journalstar.com)
Marshall, TX: Billy F. Wall and Sandra S. Wall have filed an asbestos lawsuit alleging that Mr. Wall’s recent diagnosis of cancer is due to his extensive asbestos exposure during his six years employment at the Longhorn Army Ammunition Plant in Harrison County.
Wall was diagnosed with colon cancer in June 2010, and with asbestos-related pleural disease and mild interstitial pulmonary fibrosis in 2011.
In his lawsuit, Wall states that he was exposed to asbestos from 1974 to 1980 while working as a pipefitter, welder and insulator at the ammunition plant. He claims that he was exposed to asbestos on a daily basis.
Wall has named 17 defendants in his lawsuit: A.W. Chesterton Co., Armstrong International Inc., Certainteed Corp., Clark-Reliance Corp., Cleaver-Brooks Co. Inc., Crane Co., Eaton Corp., Eaton Hydraulics Inc., Eaton Hydraulics, Emerson Process Management Power & Water Solutions Inc., Fisher Controls International, Power Controls, Spirax Sarco Inc., The J. Graves Insulation Co. Inc., The WM. Powell Co., Watts Water Technologies Inc., and Young Touchstone.
The defendants are accused of failing to warn, failing to test their products concerning the effects of exposure, failing to instruct or notify users or consumers of their products of proper safety measures and for failing to properly package their products so that proper labeling and instructions were easily visible.
Mr. Wall is asking for an award of damages for medical expenses, mental anguish, impairment, loss of enjoyment of life, physical pain and suffering, and court costs. Mrs. Wall is asking the court for an award of damages for mental anguish, loss of consortium and society and loss of household services. (setexasrecord.com)
Ride the Ducks Accident Settles, Some Question Canopy Safety
May 17th, 2012. By AbiK
The recent multimillion-dollar Ride the Ducks settlement serves as a stark reminder that even the most seemingly innocent of rides can spell disaster. Ride the Ducks—those amphibious vehicles that have become a tourist attraction at a number of locations across the US—would appear to be a pretty tame ride compared to what’s on tap at your local Six Flags theme park—that is, of course, if your eardrums can withstand the continual honking of the duck quack whistles all Ride the Ducks passengers receive (see below right).
Unfortunately though, for two Hungarian students who were visiting Philadelphia in July, 2010, their Ride the Ducks experience ended in death—and wrongful death lawsuits.
The duck boat, which in the Philly location drive-swims into the Delaware River, had had a mechanical failure and was floating adrift in the river when it was struck by a tugboat-guided barge. Sixteen year old Dora Schwendtner and twenty-year old Szabolcs Prem both drowned following the incident.
Both the Ride the Ducks tour company and the tugboat operator were sued—and the tugboat pilot, Matthew Devlin, was sentenced to a year in prison after pleading guilty to misconduct of a ship operator. (Both defendants had blamed each other for the accident.)
The Ride the Ducks Philly tour boats are back in the water—they’ve been given the ok by the US Coast Guard–but not everyone thinks they’re the safest things on the water. The boats have canopies—which, having been on one in the dead of summer, was a welcome relief from the glaring sun. However, in the event of capsize, the canopy could become a trap leaving passengers struggling to free themselves from underneath it while under water. The irony of it is that it might be easier to escape a canopy trap without having a life jacket on–but, of course, no one would advocate not wearing a life jacket.
The Ride the Ducks settlement was for $15 million, to be split by both families of the victims. A $2 million fund was also set up for 18 other passengers who survived the duck boat accident. At the time of the accident, there were approximately 4o people onboard the duck boat.
Actos Lawsuit Angles: How Many Can You Come Up With?
May 14th, 2012. By AbiK
If you’ve tried to figure out what’s going on with Actos—and more specifically, Actos lawsuits–you’ve probably found it can get a bit confusing. This drug has more lawsuit angles now than a tetrahedron. So here’s a list of Actos lawsuit angles:
Actos Bladder Cancer Lawsuits
Actos bladder cancer lawsuits are not class action lawsuits. These are lawsuits filed by individuals who allege they now have bladder cancer because of taking Actos to treat their type 2 diabetes.
When there are many individual lawsuits claiming similar injury (i.e., Actos bladder cancer) brought on by the same defendant(s), it’s a mass tort not a class action. The reason for that is because even though all the victims have bladder cancer, each individual case will be different—for example, the extent of harm will be different from one victim to another, and any damages paid needs to reflect that. In a class action lawsuit, everyone in the class receives the same exact damages.
Typically, parts of a mass tort that are in common across all injured parties will be consolidated into what’s called ‘multi-district litigation’ (MDL). Once the common aspects of all the lawsuits have been resolved, any individual lawsuit differences can be addressed.
Actos Class Action Lawsuit
While there is not an Actos class action lawsuit for bladder cancer injury itself, there has been an Actos class action filed that alleges Takeda, the manufacturer of Actos, engaged in wrongful conduct when it designed, manufactured and marketed the drug–because the drug wound up being linked to bladder cancer and getting an FDA warning because of it.
Actos Whistleblower Lawsuit
Moving right along, a former consultant for Takeda, Dr. Helen Ge, came forward in a whistleblower lawsuit stating that Takeda knew about and yet either did not report or underreported cases of both Actos bladder cancer and Actos myocardial infarction (i.e., Actos heart attack).
According the lawsuit, Ge asserted that “Takeda instructed its medical reviewers not to report hundreds of non-hospitalized or non-fatal congestive heart failure cases as ‘serious adverse events and thus avoided its responsibility of accurately analyzing and reporting these hundreds of serious adverse events to the FDA.
Actos Heart Attack Lawsuit
Like the song “One Thing Leads to Another”, the Actos whistleblower lawsuit sheds light on another potential Actos lawsuit angle: myocardial infarction. Initally, in 2007, the FDA placed a warning on Actos (and Avandia) for congenital heart failure. That warning, however, did not include mention of mycardial infarction (i.e., heart attack). Yet, there had been complaints of Actos heart attack, and those complaints more or less hung in limbo. With Dr. Ge stepping forward, however, it would appear that her allegations could spell more lawsuits for Takeda—this time from Actos heart attack victims. If, in fact, Takeda knew that there was an increased risk for myocardial infarction given their own adverse event reports but did not report that risk, the potential for additional Actos lawsuits is there.
And that could perhaps mean a whole other Actos lawsuit…in the form of an Actos class action. After all, remember how Takeda aggressively advertised that it was a “safer” alternative to Avandia once Avandia took the hit for heart side effects? Stay tuned.
Popular Categories
Archive by Category
- Accidents (RSS)
- Airlines (RSS)
- Asbestos Mesothelioma (RSS)
- Automotive (RSS)
- Celebrity (RSS)
- Complaints/Comments (RSS)
- Consumer Fraud (RSS)
- Court of Public Opinion (RSS)
- Criminal Law (RSS)
- Defective Products (RSS)
- DePuy ASR Hip Recall (RSS)
- Discrimination (RSS)
- Drugs/Medical (RSS)
- Elder Care Abuse (RSS)
- Employment (RSS)
- Environment (RSS)
- Financial (RSS)
- Food Illness (RSS)
- Human/Civil Rights (RSS)
- Insecurities (RSS)
- Insurance (RSS)
- Intellectual Property (RSS)
- Internet/E-commerce (RSS)
- Lawyers (RSS)
- Lawyers Giving Back (RSS)
- Lex Levity (RSS)
- Personal Injury (RSS)
- Pleading Ignorance (RSS)
- Real Estate (RSS)
- Securities (RSS)
- Settlement (RSS)
- Tort Reform (RSS)
- Totally Tortelicious (RSS)
- Veterans (RSS)
- Week Adjourned (RSS)
- Whistleblower (RSS)
Loading ...
