Archive for the ‘Class Action News’ Category

Class Action Lawsuit – Emdeon Inc.

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.

Class Action Complaint Against Ebix, Inc.

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.

Dyer & Berens LLP Files Class Action Lawsuit

Dyer & Berens LLP ( 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 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’s Class Action Lawsuit Latest

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.

Medicaid Brand-Name Drugs When Prescribed Class Action Suit

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.

New Class Action Lawsuit Against Google

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.

What Will Happen to John O’Quinn Class Action Former Clients?

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.


Bad Behavior has blocked 508 access attempts in the last 7 days.