Class Action Lawsuits

A mortgage loan consists of an amount of money which is borrowed to purchase property and then repaid over a period of time (typically 15 or 30 years). The full amount or principal is repaid along with interest according to the payment structure of the loan.

Mortgage modification alters the original terms of a mortgage that were laid out in the initial loan contract between the lending institution and the homeowner. It is typically used when the borrower is having trouble making payments per the agreed terms. The modification can change the amount of the monthly payment and interest rate as well as other items outlined in the contract such as principle, loan term, late fees etc.

The lending institution is usually motivated to offer a mortgage modification when the borrower is experiencing financial issues. They would rather offer improved terms and a lower payment as this offers greater profits than if the property went into foreclosure.

If the government (federal or state) gets involved they may offer the lending institution incentives to participate. The Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) was introduced by the federal government during 2009 to help homeowners who were struggling with their mortgages. At the time there was approaching eight million homeowners in trouble. The program was designed to help homeowners by standardizing mortgage modification with the goal of lower monthly mortgage payments. Up to 110 lending institutions joined this program.

The result of this was that many homeowners applied for a mortgage adjustment via HAMP after it was introduced by the Obama administration. Homeowners were put on a three month trial by their mortgage service providers at the new lowered payments. Many homeowners took part in the trial only to be refused permanent modification on completion – many were given no reason as to why.

Because of this many people are showing up behind in their mortgage payments and have reduced credit scores after all the effort. The result is that some of the lending institutions are threatening these borrowers with foreclosure.

Many of these homeowners have joined together in a class action lawsuit against some of the countries top lending institutions including Bank of America, Chase, Wells Fargo and CitiMortgage. This shows that borrowers are non too happy with the way they have been treated since enrolling in HAMP. It is estimated that only a third of those who entered the trial were given permanent status.

Many of the lawsuits state that the lending institutions broke the trial contracts by not giving permanent status to those that successfully completed the trial. The lenders state that the trials were never contracts and they used their discretion in choosing permanent partners.

It is also stated that the lenders contracts with HAMP and the Treasury were in breach for not offering permanent modification to those completing the trial. The judges involved have stated that homeowners should not be part of this because it is between the lenders and the government. The legal advisers to the homeowners do not agree with this – and the lenders broke the contracts with the homeowners.

These lawsuits could affect 620,000 involved in trial modifications. They state that the lenders benefited not providing permanent modification by defaulting the loans so they could make increased profits via late fees and financial charges. It is charged that the lenders ignored letters and requests and hindered inquiries when homeowners tried to contact them. All this after receiving billions from the government. Many borrowers were left in a worse state than prior to the modification. Many could not seek additional solutions to the problem and were faced with foreclosure.

Image via Creative Commons

CitiMortgage are faced with a class action lawsuit filed by homeowners that alleges that the company did not fulfill their promise to provide mortgage borrowers reduced loan payments.  If fact the suit states that it also financially devastated the borrowers.

The lawsuit states that homeowners with a mortgage loan from CitiMortgage could us a trial mortgage modification program to help them reduce payments.  This program was built around the U.S. Treasury Department’s Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP).  The program would become official if the homeowners lasted the three month trial period making the reduced payment amounts

Many homeowners completed the trial and followed all stipulations of the program – however they were denied access to the permanent program.  This made things very difficult for the homeowners and many were in a worse situation after they completed the trial.

The lawsuit claims that CitiMortgage did not honor its agreements with homeowners and that it misrepresented the information of the program.

The lawsuit is open to all persons in the US who are serviced by CitiMortgage and who complied with the conditions of the trial program and who did not receive permanent mortgage modification per the loan modification agreement.

More on Mortgage Modification Lawsuits

There are currently fifteen law schools facing class action suits brought about because of alleged deceptive employment data – including post-graduate employment statistics. The suits have been brought about by recent graduates from the law schools.

Albany Law School
Brooklyn Law School
California Western School of Law
Chicago-Kent College of Law
Cooley Law
DePaul University College of Law
Florida Coastal School of Law
Golden Gate University School of Law
Hofstra Law School
John Marshall School of Law (Chicago)
New York Law School
Pace University School of Law
Southwestern Law School
St. John’s University School of Law
University of Baltimore School of Law
University of San Francisco School of Law
Widener University School of Law

The suits state that the schools enlarge graduate employment numbers – using tactics such as counting their own graduates employed in temporary work at the law schools, as well as graduates employed in non legal work. This includes temporary and part time employment.

The lawsuits also state that average salary figures are based on a small amount of graduates earning large salaries.

Many students signed up for the colleges based on the false data and are now faced with high debt and small chance of employment in the legal field.

Image via Creative Commons

A class action lawsuit has been filed against AT&T by a customer claiming that AT&T has been overcharging its customers subscribing to their iPhone and iPad data plan by up to 300 percent. An independent consultant was hired to test data transmitted and received by an iPhone device. This consultant determined that AT&T customers are charged for data even when the iPhones and iPads were unable to transmit or receive data.

During 2010 AT&T had another class action lawsuit settled when they taxed their smartphone customers improperly for Internet usage. They changed their unlimited data plan service during 2010 offering new customers the option of 200 MB or 2 GB monthly data plans.

People who had contact with asbestos in the work place have developed Mesothelioma as well as lung cancer or asbestosis. Mesothelioma is a rare cancer of the mesothelium part of the lungs. Asbestos was a popular building material as it is extremely fire resistant and repelled chemicals and electricity. It was used in many products in the building industry including insulation and drywall. It was also found in pipe covers and certain types of clothing. By the 1920s medical experts began noticing that breathing the product caused lung ailments. Most companies ignored medical warnings and its use was continued. In the 1970s there was a shift and regulations were put on the product. By the early 1980s asbestos was being regulated by the government and banned in certain cases.

Breathing asbestos fibers is the only known cause of malignant mesothelioma lung cancer. This can happen long after exposure to the substance – even a small amount. It can take decades for the cancer to develop.

If you are a loved one was exposed to asbestos you are advised to consult a medical professional and seek legal help.

See article – When will the Class Action on Mesothelioma be Resolved?

Accutane (Isotretinoin) is an acne drug used to treat sever acne and it has been linked with side effects including inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis caused as a result of using the medication. The lawsuit claims that the drug manufacturer failed to warn doctors and patients about these serious side effects of the drug. Patients suffering from these side effects may be due a monitory settlement.

Ulcerative colitis affects the colon/rectum and causes inflammation of the digestive tract. This results in diarrhea and abdominal pain. Other symptoms include bloody diarrhea, weight loss, abdominal cramping and pain, and night sweats. Fulminant colitis is a rare version of ulcerative colitis – and can cause serious complications such as toxic megacolon and colon rupture.

Crohn’s disease typically affects the intestines and symptoms include abdominal pain, diarrhea, rectal bleeding and constipation.

If you are a loved one has taken Accutane and developed Crohn’s disease, inflammatory bowel disease or ulcerative colitis you may be able to participate in an Accutane lawsuit.

The Kardashian sisters – Kim, Khloe and Kourtney stars of the reality TV show “Keeping Up With the Kardashians” are faced with a $5 million class action lawsuit for their involvement with QuickTrim – an alleged weight loss product.

The defendants are alleged to have marketed QuickTrim stating that it increases metabolism, curbs appetite, and promotes weight loss.

The Manhattan federal court states that QuickTrim’s main ingredient is caffeine, which the FDA has determined is not a safe or effective treatment for weight control.  This has reportedly upset QuickTrim consumers some of whom state the use of false advertising.  Photos of the Kardashian sisters in revealing outfits is also alleged to be misleading.  Kim and Khloe have both tweeted that they have experienced 15 pound weight loss attributable to QuickTrim.  Legal experts argue this is false advertising.

The drug Actos (Pioglitazone) is prescribed to people with type 2 diabetes.  Its used to control blood sugar levels in conjunction with exercise and diet.  It increases how insulin is used by the body.  The drug is normally taken once daily.  It does not cure the type 2 diabetes.

It has been discovered that there are indications that the drug has serious side effects.  These include heart related issues such as congestive heart disease and bladder cancer.

The list of side effects includes bladder cancer, bone damage, liver damage, kidney damage, heart failure, heart attacks and other heart disease.

If you have been taking Actos and have developed symptoms of these diseases such as unexpected weight gain, shortness of breath, a slow heart rate or bladder problems then contact your doctor immediately.  You may also wish to seek legal help

Transvaginal surgical mesh (TMV) is used during surgery for stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP).   The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has put forth a safely warning to doctors and patients that use of TMV  through the vagina for  pelvic organ prolapsed (POP) may be exposing patients to additional risks.

This is a common surgical procedure amongst women and a third of these make use of mesh and three quarters are done through the vagina.  The lawsuit claims that woman as a result of the mesh surgery have experienced complications including:  erosion of the mesh into the vagina, infection, urinary problems, migration, vaginal pain, pelvic pain, urinary problems, skin split or mesh protrudes, pain during sex, vaginal scarring, narrowing of vaginal wall, mesh shrinkage as well as recurrence of the original problem, or the need for corrective surgery.

Manufacturers of TMV include Johnson & Johnson,  Boston Scientific,  C.R. Bard,  and American Medical Systems.

If you have suffered because of these types of surgery you should contact your doctor to be evaluated.  You should also contact a personal injury lawyer for their opinion.

Zoloft  the antidepressant has been hit by lawsuits alleging that the drug has affected women who took the medicine while pregnant and has resulted in babies being born with heart birth defects.   The lawsuits state that the manufacturer of Zoloft knew that there were risks associated with taking the drug during pregnancy and that adequate warning was not issued to patients and doctors.

The latest lawsuit states that the drug caused a baby to be born with a congenital birth defect and that Pfizer did not warn patients using the drug of the risks and that they concealed and suppressed information about Zoloft use while pregnant.

Zoloft is a Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) and that these types of antidepressants had been introduced while they were linked to an increased risk of certain congenital defects including Persistent Pulmonary Hypertension and other heart defects.

Originally the  US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had issued a warning that SSRIs stating that the drug could possibly cause an increased risk of pulmonary hypertension of the newborn. This was retracted during December of 2011 stating that links between use while pregnant and pulmonary hypertension was premature.

Parents with babies born with these types of heart problems after use of Zoloft have blames the drug and it’s manufacturer Pfizer and they have filed lawsuits against Pfizer alleging its drug caused birth defects and accusing Pfizer of negligence and fraud.

The FDA currently does not have a definitive stance regarding SSRI medications and so women are left to determine the risks of using the drugs or having untreated depression while pregnant.

Individuals who obtained an adjustable rate mortgage (ARM) from Chase ( either JP Morgan Chase Bank or Chase Home Finance) before April 2006 are seeking compensation as part of a class action lawsuit.  This is happening only in California at the moment – though borrowers in other states can instigate legal action if Chase set their interest rate wrong.

The loan documents stated that the initial interest rate  would be the sum of a specified Index plus a set Margin or, a rate less than that sum.  The documents also stated  “Your interest rate will be based on the weekly average yield on United States Treasury securities adjusted to a constant maturity of 1 year (the ‘Index’) plus an amount called a ‘Margin.’”

Later in the document, the disclosures stated that “Your initial interest rate may be discounted and will not be tied to the Index.”   Thus the bank allegedly charged the borrowers an initial interest rate higher than the sum of the Index and Margin.

There is a class action lawsuit against Domino’s Pizza claiming that they violated federal law by conducting background checks on job applicants.  This case has been upheld by Maryland’s federal court after the pizza company tried to get it dismissed.

The case states that Domino’s did not comply with the legal requirements of the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) by (1) running background checks on employees without proper authorization, and (2) “systematically” failing to provide employees with copies of their background checks prior to taking adverse employment action against them.

Claims have been made that checks were performed on individuals before they started working, and they were subsequently dismissed based on undisclosed information discovered during their background checks.  This information was never shared with them by Domino’s.  Also they were not provided a copy of the report or advised of any rights before the termination. Additionally  they were required to sign a consent form that contained extraneous information and was not separate from the application packet.

The law states that employers must provide certain information to consumers before taking any adverse action against them – including not hiring them or terminating them – if the background check is completed after hiring. A a copy of the background check report as well as a statement of their rights prepared by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which enforces the FCRA should be given at that time. Consumers are thus protected against inaccurate or incomplete background checks and are given the opportunity to set the record straight.

Up to $1,000 damages per person can be awarded in this case.

A class action lawsuit has been filed against Sony re their Terms of Service for the PlayStation 3.  They were updated during September 2011 and the change meant that people were forbidden from joining a class action lawsuit against them – unless they opted out by letter within thirty days.

The lawsuit states that Sony engaged in unfair business practices and forced consumers to give up their rights – or give up their online gaming access.

The revised terms were hidden in the twenty one page Terms of Service contract.  They also did not post an online version of the most recent Terms of Service, which they’ve done in the past.

Sony are still to make a comment on the class action lawsuit.

Wells Fargo has a class action lawsuit filed against it that claims that the bank illegally refused to grant permanent loan modifications that it had promised  homeowners who successfully completed a trial mortgage modification under the Homeowner Affordable Modification Program (HAMP).

It states Wells Fargo committed breaches of contract and violated California consumer protection laws by misrepresenting the terms of the HAMP trial periods plans (TPP), designed to be a path toward a permanent mortgage modification.

Homeowners were give lower mortgage payments  for 3 months to prove they could make payments.  They stated in a letter received by these homeowners that  if they “make those payments successfully and fulfill all the trial period conditions, we will permanently modify your mortgage loan.”

This did not occur and the lawsuit states that it was a scheme to get homeowners to send in their payments – and that they never intended to make them permanent.  Wells Fargo got millions of dollars from this during the period.

Update 3/16/2012

Its interesting to note the following:

The CEO of Wells Fargo John Stumpf received $17.9 million in compensation in 2011.  Wells Fargo’s net income was $15.87 billion in 2011, up from $12.36 billion in 2010.

More information on Mortgage Modification Lawsuits

Sirius XM is involved in a class action lawsuit dating from 2009.  This is still an open case.

The case was brought about after the satellite radio company purchased its competitor XM Satellite Radio during 2008 and then raised its prices.  So in effect it removed its competition and put up its prices.  During this time it also raised the fee on music royalties.  This brought about the allegations of antitrust violations.

Approval for mergers of these type must come from the U.S. Federal Communications Commission and the Justice Department.  Sirius XM made certain promises to get this approval.  They broke certain promises and this is also contained in the class action lawsuit.

In their defense Sirius XM stated that they were faced with higher costs after the merger.

A settlement was reached in the lawsuit and preliminary approval was given during May 2011.  Approval must be satisfactory to both sides if the settlement is to be successful.

There is a national class action lawsuit on behalf of all shareholders of Emdeon Inc. The complaint alleges, among other things, that Emdeon’s Board of Directors failed to act in the best interest of shareholders and breached its fiduciary duties by approving Blackstone Capital Partners VI L.P.’s attempt to acquire a controlling interest in Emdeon for $19.00 per Emdeon share, which will result in Emdeon becoming a private company. The transaction is expected to close in second half of 2011, subject to customary closing conditions, including shareholder and regulatory approvals.

Harwood Feffer LLP announced today that a class action complaint has been filed against Ebix, Inc. and certain of the Company’s officers for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The action, brought on behalf of those purchasing the common stock of Ebix between May 6, 2009 through June 30, 2011, is pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.

Washington homeowners have sued Bank of America because the bank is refusing to part with government funds that were to be used to help homeowners who were facing foreclosure. The Bank of America class action lawsuit attorneys want to communicate with eligible home owners who believe were prevented from or wrongfully not allowed a permanent mortgage adjustment as stated in the Home Assistance Modification Program (HAMP).  The bank has over a million morgages that potentially can be helped but only offered help to 12,761 mortgage holders.

This lawsuit which has been filed in U.S. District Court, makes the claim that Bank of America attempts to slow or prevent Washington homeowners from accessing the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) funds.  It is stated that they deliberately ignore the homeowner’s wish to make adjustments to their mortgage or in fact any other different solutions that would stop their homes from foreclosure.

Bank of America received over twenty five billion dollars in government bailout money.  This is money that had been financed by U.S. taxpayers and was specifically put aside to help homeowners who were facing difficulties so that they could try and avoid foreclosure.  The bank, by accepting the money, was obliged to try and help homeowners find ways around foreclosure by reducing monthly mortgage payments.  The lawsuits states that this did not happen.

The bank should be offering a revised 3 month payment plan and if this is successful then they must offer this as a permanent modification to the mortgage plan.  The lawsuit claims this is not happening and that the bank interfered with requests from homeowners and denied them funds to help prevent them from entering foreclosure.  The result was that Bank of America benefited from the funds and additionally acquired additional fees and interest rates from the homeowners.

Homeowners who did not receive an adequate response from the bank after April 13, 2009 can join the suit.

During July, 2011 Bank of America lost its bid to get the lawsuit dismissed.  The judge stated that homeowners who qualified for HAMP and did not receive any modification could continue with claims against the bank.

More information related to  Mortgage Modification Lawsuits

Dyer & Berens LLP ( www.DyerBerens.com) today announced that it has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of investors who purchased NIVS IntelliMedia Technology Group, Inc. (“NIVS” or the “Company”) (AMEX: NIV) common stock between March 24, 2010 and March 25, 2011, inclusive (the “Class Period”).

What actions may I take at this time? If you purchased during the Class Period and wish to serve as a lead plaintiff, you must request appointment by the court no later than May 30, 2011. If you would like to discuss this action, the lead plaintiff process, or have any questions concerning this notice, please contact plaintiff’s counsel, Jeffrey A. Berens, Esq., at (888) 300-3362 x302 or via email at jeff@dyerberens.com. Any member of the putative class may request a lead plaintiff appointment through counsel of its choice or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member.

What are the allegations in the complaint? NIVS is an integrated consumer electronics company that designs, manufactures, markets and sells intelligent audio and video products and mobile phones in China, Greater Asia, Europe and North America. According to the complaint, during the Class Period, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company’s business, operations, and prospects, including that the Company: (i) had inaccurately recorded certain transactions; (ii) had discrepancies in its accounts receivables; (iii) was engaged in illegal acts involving its accounting records and bank statements; (iv) failed to record its financial results in accordance with GAAP; and (v) lacked adequate internal controls.

On March 25, 2011, the Company filed a Form 8-K with the SEC that disclosed that the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors had approved the dismissal of NIVS’s independent auditor, MaloneBailey LLP. According to the Company, MaloneBailey “based its resignation on what it characterized [as] illegal acts involving the Company’s accounting records and bank statements and discrepancies in accounts receivable.

Based upon the foregoing, the complaint charges NIVS and certain of its officers and directors with violations of the federal securities laws.

WalMart is in the middle of a class action dispute over alleged gender bias in pay and promotions.

Title: Dukes vs. Wal-Mart Stores

WalMart is getting sued by a female employee for sexual discrimination via Title VII of the Civil Rights Act 1964.  She claims she was denied a promotion after years of excellent employment and evaluations.  The suit now represents all female employees working from 1998 on.

This case which was filed in 2000 is still pending and the amount is estimated to be $11 billion.

What are class action lawsuits? Such suits are filed for a group of people who have been injured in one way or another by a company’s actions. Commonly, these lawsuits may be filed by company members if practices regarding hiring or salary are illegal; another type of class action lawsuit is filed when a company causes injury or death or some type of physical damage to a group of people, such as in the case of a drug company that made claims about their product that’s illegal, harming those who ended up taking those drugs.

Usually, when an individual joins a class action suit, he or she must sign papers that forfeits the right to sue the company individually. If the lawsuit is successful, then damages are awarded to the plaintiffs with regard to those who suffered the most damage. Not all members of the suit share in the compensation equally.

Attorneys will work on such cases on contingency, receiving a part of the award, but with the knowledge that if they don’t succeed, they won’t charge their group of clients any fees. In this instance, the attorneys may receive as much as thirty or fifty percent of the entire award.

If you’ve joined a class action lawsuit, you’ll find that the awards may be split into two different types: compensatory and punitive damages. Compensatory damages addresses the defendants (the companies being sued) and the direct damage they’ve caused. The monies here are intended to help compensate for illness or loss of life, attempting as much as possible to make whole the individuals who have suffered. Punitive damages, as the name implies, intends to punish the companies, a cost which may be extremely high, in order to discourage the company or other companies from having the same reckless disregard for either the plaintiff’s safety, health, or well-being.

Did you know that millions and millions of dollars of settlements from class action suits have been unclaimed by the plaintiffs, consumers, small businesses, investors and the general public? Hundreds of millions of dollars get reverted back to the same companies that were found to be in the wrong or who agreed to settle the cases out of court.

The reason why so much settlement money goes unclaimed is the majority of people who are entitled to the settlement money simply don’t know it, or they never receive official notification in the mail, never opened the mail, or they died, or because they really didn’t want to fill out the very long, complex legal documents required in order to claim the funds. For these reasons, a significant amount of people do not take advantage of their personal legal rights. Basically, they are being denied justice.

Unclaimed settlement money is a complete irritant to the courts, because unclaimed money is an issue for the claim administrators and disbursing agents who are in charge of the distributing class action settlement money to harmed individuals. As each year passes, the aggregated total of unclaimed cash, which was earmarked for distribution from class action settlement funds, escrow accounts increases.

In the early 80′s, many lawyers began to appeal to the courts to not give the unclaimed money back to the wrongful defendants, but use the Cy Pres doctrine, which translates to ‘as nearly as possible’. Meaning, the lawyers said the unclaimed money should be dispersed to projects that are as close to the original intention as possible. Mostly, all unclaimed settlement money now goes to help the community as a whole, for instance to help lower income families, to charities and to other organizations that help improve the quality of life for all concerned. Currently, many class action law firms are now requesting, before a settlement is agreed upon, that the defendant in the case agrees to allow unclaimed settlement money to be given to charities.

Class action law suits are certainly more in the news today than they ever were. There’s always been a lot of public interest in class action, because the nature of the suit does have a kind of sensational nature at its core. But perhaps more importantly, the reason they’re interesting these days is because they serve as a kind of pie in the sky hope for a lot of people. The idea that anyone could have been wronged by a large corporation and entitled to a sizable cash settlement is a dream that’s almost as common as winning the lottery, and it might be as unlikely, too. What exactly is a class action suit, then?

A class action suit is where a large number of people have been wronged by a corporation or business, usually, or some kind of body that is difficult for most ordinary people to contend with. The character of the wrong is usually based in some kind of physical harm. The most commonly referenced class action, for purposes of an example, involves the many suits filed against the asbestos companies, and asbestos mines. In those cases, working people were exposed to a very dangerous chemical over a prolonged period. The risks of exposure to asbestos could lead to sickness and even cancers. The nature of the risks were not unknown to the companies, either, so that when the class actions went to trial, there was very little they could do to deny that they had put their employees at risk.

From this example, then, we can see that a class action is something that’s on a fairly large scale, where the threat to health is very grave. Groups of people will usually file these together, because the defendant in these is never an individual, but a body of people who have been harmed. This also offers a kind of safety in numbers, where it might be possible to have more people come forward when they have a more reasonable suspicion that some good would come out of it, rather than further injustice. Class action suits appeal to the sympathy we all have for the underdog, and they play into all the elements of that classic myth.

A Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) is a procedure utilized in the federal court system to transfer to one federal judge all pending civil cases of a similar type filed throughout the United States. A Class Action Lawsuit is a lawsuit where a large group of people collectively bring a claim to court and where a class of defendants are sued. The difference is that a class action lawsuit can be transferred to a MDL where a Judicial Panel was created by legislation in 1968 in response to the complexity among the courts to coordinate almost 2,000 related cases that were pending in a total of 36 districts around the country that alleged a nationwide antitrust conspiracy among electrical equipment manufacturers.

The Judicial Panel on MDL, which consists of seven judges presided over by a chairman, was needed to coordinate the difficult cases filed in multiple districts. The duties of each Judicial Panel member is the same with respect of deciding cases. However, the chairman of the panel has additional responsibilities because the chairman is responsible for the oversight of the panel’s office, the staff of 20 employees, and the budget. Plus, the chairman will handle any necessary contact’s with the transferee districts.

The decision whether cases should be transferred is made by the panel of seven federal judges, these judges are appointed by the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. The Judicial Panel on MDL meet, on a periodic basis, to review requests that cases be consolidated for pretrial matters pursuant to the law passed by Congress. Even though the panel meets in various cities throughout the U.S., the Clerk of the Panel is permanently stationed in Washington D.C. The judge who has all the federal cases assigned is known as the ‘transferee judge.’ The judges, who are throughout the U.S., send cases to the MDL judge and are known as the ‘transferor judges’ or the ‘transferor courts.’

Class actions are rather interesting for students of law, and anyone else that might be interested in the legal system in general. They point out general inequities and wrong-doing on a large scale, and some of the most exciting lawsuits revolve around class action. There is something of the underdog myth at work here, where the average worker goes up against the big corporation and sometimes wins. This underdog myth can become even more marked when it comes to play in the field of unions. So what, exactly, constitutes class action in a union grievance?

Class actions are distinguished from other general wrong-doings because of their scale. In a class action, a large group of people have had an injustice done to them, and they have decided to take it up with the wrong-doers in a legal forum. These cases appeal to the general population because there are usually real people involved, actively fighting a system that is usually known for ignoring the people. It’s a pretty classic tale, and the cinemas are filled with these kinds of stories. When there is a verdict on the side of those filing the class action, there is a sense that the verdict speaks for everyone. When it’s lost, there’s still a sense of justice being served, fighting the law and the law wins.

In unions generally, when an individual feels that there is a rule that has been broken, such as overtime without pay, they can file a grievance. Grievances have a very particular code in unions, and they go through a very specific process, and usually very quickly.

Oftentimes, when more than one individual feels wronged, the grievance process can take care of the problems quickly and efficiently. However, when there seems to be larger battle at hand, and something the union might see as a more difficult fight, and there are enough individuals who have suffered under the same discrepancy, they can take it the level of class action. When this happens, it becomes more serious, and there is a decision to put it at the level of us vs. them, rather than trying to settle it in a more inconspicuous way.

There has been a settlement in a class-action lawsuit that will guarantee Medicaid beneficiaries to continue purchasing prescription drugs at a minimal cost when they become eligible for Medicare. The class action lawsuit, filed in 2007 by the Center of Medicare Advocacy and the National Senior Citizens Law Center in the United States District Court in San Francisco, on behalf of the 6.2 million Medicaid beneficiaries who alleged they were overcharged for drugs or even turned away from pharmacies due to processing delays of Medicare enrollment.

Medicare law states that people enrolled in both Medicaid and Medicare are to receive any assistance with purchasing prescription drugs and the beneficiaries who are eligible, will only have a co-pay as low as $1.05 to $3.10 for brand-name drugs. But, it was alleged that the beneficiaries were charged as much as $35 to $75 dollars. Evidence shows that their low-income status was not properly shared by government agencies, pharmacies and insurers.

The attorney for the plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit, claim that the delays have shortened since the Medicare prescription drug benefit took effect back in 2006. But, the average wait time currently is five to six weeks before tens of thousands of Medicaid beneficiaries who transfer to Medicare every month can begin receiving prescription drug benefits.

The settlement will make the Government change its computer system, which will allow states to submit names of new low-income Medicare beneficiaries more than once a month. Government officials will be required to process the submissions within one day. Insurers that deliver drug benefits, must also provide drugs at a minimal costs of all low-income Medicare beneficiaries who have qualified for additional assistance. Plus, if a beneficiary claims eligibility, but doesn’t have the proper documentation, or is soon to run out of medication, federal officials are required to immediately contact the state Medicaid agency to confirm their eligibility.

The settlement agreement is a great win for many of the United States most vulnerable citizens who face life-threatening delays in obtaining vital medications. Because of the class action lawsuit, it is now easier for the poorest beneficiaries to navigate Medicare Part D.

Class action lawsuits are more common and issue inclusive than what many people realize. Many major Supreme Court cases have their origins in class action law, and the abortion issue is just one of them. One of the largest and most socially impacting pieces of legislation to be written in this country began as a class action suit that challenged the abortion issue. One of the most fundamental class actions suits related to abortion dealt with legislation involved with the 1973 Roe vs Wade Supreme Court case. The origins of this situation would not only become a class action suit be go on to manifest one of the most important and continually protested progressive legal outcomes in this country.

This original situation was based on a woman in Texas, Norma McCorvey, who became pregnant and wanted to have an abortion. During the 1960s many states across the country had begun to legalize abortion, while others, such as Texas, kept it illegal except in the case where it would threaten the life of the mother. Many women who became pregnant in these states would travel to an abortion providing state to secure their services. However, in the case of McCorvey, she became pregnant, wished to terminate it and did not have the financial resources to go to a state that could provide the abortion. This was a common situation faced by many women in abortion-restricted states. McCorvey was referred to an attorney in Dallas and her case was combined with that of a married couple. This couple had declared that abortion interfered with their marital relations because the wife could not use birth control for medical reasons.

These two cases formed the base of the class action suit that would eventually reach the Supreme Court and become the landmark legislation that gives women across the country the uninhibited right to legal physical autonomy. Abortion has been an extremely heated and frequently controversial political and social issue in this country every since it was originally transferred into the mainstream medical system. In addition to the numerous ongoing legislation battles over the issue there have also been a large number of lawsuits and various health care and social service providers have been involved. There has also been multiple class action lawsuits established that relate to the abortion issue.

Google is now facing a separate class action lawsuit over their reproduction of books online. Photographers and illustrators today filed suit claiming Google displays copyrighted images without compensating the artists who created them.

The 2005 lawsuit filed by authors and publishers is expected to be settled soon. Visual artists were excluded from participating in that case.  The new lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in New York.  You can read more on CNN’s SciTechBlog.

Class action lawsuits can be pretty involved cases, and some of them can take years to resolve. It gets even more complicated when there is more money involved, not necessarily because those cases are more important. Usually they bring in more heavy-hitters on the litigation teams, and this can escalate the legal arguments exponentially. For law students, these can be some of the most fascinating cases, and for others, they are simply bewildering. Looking at something like bankruptcy, and how that affects a securities class action, can lead to some interesting legal questions.

First, a securities class action is one where there is an accusation of some kind of gross misconduct on the part of an individual or corporation, where large amounts of money have been misused. Generally, there are investments involved, and money is used inappropriately. An example of this would be a company who uses their workers’ pensions for their own investment purposes, then lose the investments, and hence lose the pension that the workers have already earned. In these cases, the class action is begun to get this money back, because it is what is legally, and morally, the workers’ money to begin with.

That example works, but may not be the most interesting, because there is clearly a right and wrong side in the case. More often, the class action will reveal more ambiguities on both sides as the case goes on. There are, as one might imagine, many instances where the one being sued will declare bankruptcy, and file for bankruptcy protection. The law is clear on most of these matters, but very good lawyers can find ways of making it more complex and nuanced. Usually bankruptcy in these cases make any further action impossible, but there are many loopholes. One option, and a very good one, is to start making claims against individuals once the corporation has declared bankruptcy, and that begins another cycle of more legal proceedings.

John O’Quinn is not around to defend himself, but if he was, he’d still be fighting for a settlement on behalf of his approximately 3,500 clients. After O’Quinn’s untimely death in an auto accident in October, his estate lawyers have agreed to pay $46.5 million to settle a case that Terry Scarborough has been pursuing for a decade for the silicon implant class-action lawsuit case to reimburse the women involved.

The issue in the litigation process is whether O’Quinn’s law firm had a right to deduct the standard fee amount from the clients’ settlements of their share of the expert studies and costs that benefited the underlying tort case dealing with the plaintiffs claim over breast implants. Scarborough has claimed that the deduction wasn’t permitted for reasons that these fees were not a provision in O’Quinns representation agreement, which an arbitration panel agreed, stating that O’Quinn was indeed in breach of his fiduciary duties.

O’Quinn appealed the arbitration, and requested a full briefing on the merits of the amount required by the security bond in the amount of $45 million dollars that was order and signed by Judge Gossett. Just before O’Quinn’s death, the Texas Supreme Court upheld Gossetts ruling. Also, after O’Quinns death, Gerald Treece, his estate lawyer, proclaimed that after studying and analyzing of the law that the case would likely have ended in a loss for O’Quinn’s’ Law Firm and it would be best to settle now rather than watching the interest required by the security bond to continue to grow. Treece finally said that the settlement was the right thing to do and that is was time all the women in the breast-implant lawsuit get whatever is due to them. As of today, with the original security bond amount of $45 million dollars, plus the interest earned up to the settlement date, the O’Quinn’s’ estate will pay out $49 million dollars.