Class Action Finder » Consumer Products

Listeria poisoning scare prompts class action against Maple Leaf

yuming — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 07:25:16 +0000

In Toronto, a class action lawsuit has been filed against Maple Leaf Goods after a listeriosis outbreak caused by its tainted meat products. So far, 20 people have died because of this harmful bacterium.

Listeriosis is a food borne illness whose symptoms include high fever, severe headaches, neck stiffness, and nausea.

In Aug 2008, the poisonous bacteria was linked to a food plant in Toronto which was temporarily shut down in the wake of the outbreak. Massive recalls of Maple Leaf products were activated.

Cheese producers in Quebec have also been affected and have been given a multi-million dollar aid package to help cope with the recent listeria crisis, which resulted in many cheese products to be seized and destroyed.

The court documents have also recounted the horrifying effects it had on victims, such as Elizabeth Schroh in Unity, Sask., whose body convulsed and struggled to breathe before she passed away.

Overseeing this lawsuit is Regina lawyer Tony Merchant who said more than 4,500 people across Canada have registered to be in the class action.

The complaint accuses Maple Leaf of negligence and the class action filed in the state of Ontario seeks CAD350 million (USD287 million) in damages.

Maple Leaf CEO Michael McCain has already apologized for the outbreak and has said his company would take full responsibility.

Pet food class action deadline is nearing

yuming — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 05:08:01 +0000

Remember the furor over melamine-tainted pet food? It seems the issue is at rest and the news is abuzz with the China milk scandal.

For those who have not heard but were affected, you’ll want to know that the deadline this class-action settlement is coming up real soon.

The deadline for filing a claim is Nov 24, 2008. The settlement is for those who purchased or whose pets consumed pet food and/or treat products recalled after March 16, 2007.

Pet food producers have a $24-million pool to divide among pet-owners who fall into this class. Thousands of pets died because of food containing wheat gluten grown in China, and countless cats and dogs fell ill.

Although there has been a resolution to this debacle, pet-owners are still unhappy, simply because, you can’t replace a pet who was part of the family with a wad of cash.

Here are the contact details for those who want to make their claim:

Visit www.petfoodsettlement.com or call toll-free 1-800-392-7785 to inquire about the settlement.

American egg producers sued

yuming — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 10:07:39 +0000

New York state restaurant, T.K. Ribbing’s Family Restaurant of Falcone, has launched a lawsuit against 13 major U.S. egg producers and three egg trade groups, with the accusation that they deliberately fixed prices by reducing the supply of eggs in the last eight years.

The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

The complaint also seeks class action status that was filed just days after the U.S. Department of Justice announced it was investigating possible antitrust violations in the egg products industry.

The restaurant believes that the defendants took part in a conspiracy that caused egg supplies to drop which led to a jump in prices. According to federal antitrust laws, competitors are not allowed to conspire for the purpose of altering prices.

The lawsuit says that the egg companies were able to dramatically increase the price of eggs from 2000 to record highs by 2007 and into 2008 through these measures.

The ways in which the egg producers conspired included delaying or reducing chick hatching, manipulate the molting of hens to keep egg production low, and restricting output in the United States and overseas exports.

The plaintiff is seeking a jury trial, and wants the case certified as a class action on behalf of other egg buyers who purchased directly from the producers. The lawsuit seeks triple damages as well as other relief under federal antitrust laws, plus attorneys’ fees and costs.

The defendants include Pilgrim’s Pride Corp, Cal-Maine Foods Inc and the trade group United Egg Producers Inc.

Bayer not sued in a class action for bio-tech rice

yuming — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 15:24:00 +0000

The good news for Bayer is that they don’t have to deal with a class action from disgruntled farmers, but that doesn’t mean it is the end of litigation.

A federal judge denied a class action lawsuit to be filed against Bayer CropScience AG over the accidental release of experimental genetically engineered rice into the food supply.

The rice farmers want to sue Bayer CropScience because they suffered great losses due to the contamination. The accidental release of the experimental rice supplies, called Liberty Link, into the public food supply in 2006 caused several foreign countries to ban imports. This led to a disastrous lowering of US rice prices.

However, the Liberty Link strain of rice was not deemed harmful to humans, but it was not approved for human consumption by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The department found that the rice was sneaked in from a corporate-funded test plot at Louisiana State University, where it was grown alongside commercial varieties.

The reason behind U.S. District Judge Catherine Perry’s ruling was that although Bayer was clearly at fault, the farmers’ claims were too different from one another to be put together into a single class action.

If the case had been certified, thousands of farmers in rice-farming states such as Missouri and Arkansas could have joined the class action.

Bayer CropScience said in a statement it “welcomed” the ruling, “We believe we have acted responsibly and have complied with all relevant regulations and guidelines in our biotech rice development activities.”

Don Downing, an attorney with Gray Ritter and Graham in St. Louis who represents farmers in the case, said the plaintiffs are considering an appeal on the ruling.

“I think a lot of farmers were waiting to see if a class was would be certified. I think now that judge Perry has declined to certify that case, then there may well be an influx of a lot more lawsuits,” said Downing.

Downing also reckoned that all the lawsuits would not have to be tried seaprately, even if they were not given class-action status.

For example, farmers might choose to litigate a handful of “test cases,” and then try to settle based on the verdicts in those cases.

Dannon yogurt class action in California

yuming — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 01:43:19 +0000

Lead plaintiff Patricia Wiener filed a class action lawsuit against yogurt company Dannon for making false claims on its probiotic products. She is represented by attorney Tim Blood from Coughlin, Stoia, Geller, Rudman & Robbins.

According to the complaint, Dannon knowingly misled consumers by promoting the clinical benefits of products that the company derived from its own testing. About $100 million was spent on advertising.

The claims were that eating Dannon’s DanActive and Activa Yogurts
were “scientifically” and “clinically” proven to “regulate your digestive system.”

In only two years, the company earned an estimated $428 million from sale of its DanActive and Activa yogurts in the US. It seemed the advertising slogan worked and was very successful.

Coined as a “discerning” consumer by her lawyer, 45-year-old health conscious Patricia Wiener wanted to try Dannon’s yogurt for its amazing digestive benefits, but found that this brand of probiotic yogurt was no different from other types. Dannon’s products are priced 30 per cent more than other brands.

Blood has a reputation for being an experienced consumer protection and litigation lawyer and found this case to be of interest.

He said, “One of the things that attracted me to case is that these are advertising claims, directed at people who are trying to do the right thing.”

He also described the Dannon suit as an uncomplicated deceptive advertising case where the facts veer to the plaintiffs’ favor.

“We have looked at all the scientific studies,” he asserted, “and retained experts and we just don’t see how Dannon can really claim that their advertising is accurate.”

If the class action litigation against Dannon were successful, the company would potentially have to compensate millions of dollars to its consumers. The lawsuit also requests that Dannon replace the misleading advertising with accurate information.

The class action certification hearing is scheduled for September 22, and Blood expects a decision will be made soon after that.

Sprint loses class action suit

yuming — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 10:01:33 +0000

In their battle over termination fees, mobile phone carrier Sprint was ordered to fork out $18.3 million to customers who filed a class action suit over fees charged for ending their contracts early.

Sprint must also pay out another $54.5 million to customers who were charged the fees but haven’t paid them yet, under the court ruling. This is a bad financial hit on already struggling Sprint.

While this class action was launched in California, it will have no direct impact on wireless customers in other states.

However, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is now considering a slew of federal proposals that will tackle early termination fees (ETFs).

Several telecommunications companies have lobbied the FCC to protect wireless carriers from class action suits filed in state court.

At an FCC hearing in July, FCC Chairman Kevin Martin raised the possibility of a plan calling for all carriers, including Sprint, to reduce ETFs over the life of the contract.

Some carriers, including industry leaders Verizon Wireless, AT&T, and T-Mobile, have this in place already.

Judge throws out peanut butter class action

yuming — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 09:31:31 +0000

Poisoned victims of the Peter Pan and Great Value peanut butter salmonella debacle from last year cannot launch a class action lawsuit against manufacturer ConAgra, which was blamed for thousands of illnesses in 2006 and 2007.

Atlanta U.S. District Judge Thomas W. Thrash Jr. ruled that a class action would not serve the purpose of compensating thousands of plaintiffs.

The judge pointed out that ConAgra has refunded more than $33 million to consumers and retailers and these refunds were “likely more effective” than a class action.

The lawyers for this case filed two classes of plaintiffs — those who had purchased the tainted peanut butter and those who were sickened or died after eating it.

Presently, there are at least 6,000 individual personal injury cases pending and that most of those trials would proceed whether or not a class action was certified, according to the judge. Therefore, a class action lawsuit would be “expensive, unnecessary, meaningless,” he said.

ConAgra did a massive recall following four deaths that stemmed from the salmonella contamination of their peanut butter. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) received reports of 628 illnesses, including 71 hospitalizations. Health officials agree that there were probably many other cases that were not reported or investigated.

Salmonella is a potentially fatal bacteria strain that is found in about a fifth of harvested peanuts. The 2007 incident was not the first case of contamination in ConAgra products.

Other than the cases filed against ConAgra in Atlanta, there are also a big number in other states.

Class action lawsuit against Dior lipstick

yuming — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 12:02:19 +0000

The use of lead in one of LVMH’s beauty products has earned the luxury goods giant a class action lawsuit. The complaint specifically refers to Dior Addict’s Positive Red lipstick.

Ruled by a court in Chicago, US. District Judge Elaine Bucklo declined LVMH’s appeal to withdraw the lawsuit brought by Pamela Stella on behalf of other class members — so that means the case will proceed.

“This is a very preliminary, procedural ruling in a lawsuit based on claims that are entirely without merit. We will continue to vigorously defend against [the] plaintiff’s baseless allegations,” LVMH responded in a statement.

The lawsuit was filed in November 2007 after the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics issued a report that claimed various popular cosmetic brands of lipstick, including Dior, have lead in them.

However, the cosmetics industry has often waved off the claims that potentially dangerous amounts of lead are found in several major brands’ lipsticks sold in the US. Though in Europe, the use of the metal in beauty products is now allowed by the Cosmetics Directive.

Dell embroiled in class action

yuming — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 08:56:41 +0000

Albuquerque lawyer Robert Fiser filed a lawsuit against Dell after purchasing a computer in 2003. He complained that the machine had less memory than was advertised by Dell and thus violated New Mexico law against unfair business practices.

The New Mexico Supreme Court is allowing a potential multi-state class action lawsuit against the Texas-based computer maker.

Dell countered this argument by saying that they wanted to go down the arbitration path which was required under the terms and conditions of computer purchases on their website.

Unfortunately, the New Mexico Supreme Court ruled against Dell, and stated that although their arbitration clause banned class action lawsuits, the court said it wasn’t valid in New Mexico.

“Contractual prohibition of class relief, as applied to claims that would be economically inefficient to bring on an individual basis, is contrary to the fundamental public policy of New Mexico to provide a forum for the resolution of all consumer claims and is therefore unenforceable in this state,” the court ruled.

General Motors defective brakes lawsuit gets class action status

yuming — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 07:48:22 +0000

Filed in Arkansas, a class action is being charged against General Motors for selling 4 million vehicles that had defectively designed brakes.

The lead plaintiff Boyd Bryant sued on behalf of himself and others who had purchased the faulty vehicles.

The complaint alleges that General Motors sold pickup trucks and sports utility vehicles whose parking brakes did not float inside the parking brakes drums properly due to a defectively designed spring clip between 1999 and 2002.

The suit accuses GM of fraudulent concealment, unjust enrichment and breach of express and implied warranties and seeks damages for repairs or reimbursement.

Bryant claims General Motors discovered the design flaw in late 2000 so the company redesigned the spring clip in October 2001. However, the car manufacturer did not take responsibility from the dealers for the defect until January 2003. As a result, the company escaped paying millions of dollars in warranty claims.

The suit accuses General Motors of fraudulent concealment, unjust enrichment and breach of express and implied warranties and seeks damages for repairs or reimbursement.

In its defense, General Motors’ lawyers argued on appeal —as product-defect laws vary from state to state, the courts should have addressed the choice-of-law issue, or the issue of which jurisdiction’s laws would apply in the case, so a nation-wide class action certification was not justified.

However, the state Supreme Court said last week that this ruling was right not to conduct a choice-of-law analysis at this stage in the case.

“Were we to require the circuit court to conclude at this time precisely which law should be applied, such a decision could potentially stray into the merits of the action itself, which we have clearly stated shall not occur during the certification process,” Justice Paul Danielson wrote for the court.

General Motors also argued that appropriate remedies will vary from person to person, so the claims could be better addressed on an individual case-by-case basis.

The Supreme Court disagreed as the main issue at hand was the brakes were defective and whether GM concealed any alleged defects, though there were some differences in facts amongst the class members’ cases.

The proceeds of the case could range from $80 million to $150 million for car owners, and up to $16.5 million for the plaintiff’s attorneys.