Class Action by Status
'closed' Listing
Publix (Background Check) »
Defendant: Publix
The lawsuit alleges Publix failed to notify employees and applicants that background checks were being conducted for employment purposes in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Individuals who were not given “stand alone” disclosures of the background check issued for employment purposes between March 12, 2012 and May 13,… Read More »
Publix (Background Check) »
Defendant: Publix
The lawsuit alleges Publix failed to notify employees and applicants that background checks were being conducted for employment purposes in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Individuals who were not given “stand alone” disclosures of the background check issued for employment purposes between March 12, 2012 and May 13, 2014 may be eligible for up to $48.55.
Settlement checks were mailed on November 26, 2014. Settlement checks must be cashed on or before May 25, 2015.
Capital One (TCPA) »
Defendant: Capital One
Consumers who received automatic non-emergency credit card default servicing call on their cell phones from Capital Management Systems, LP, Leading Edge Recovery Solutions, LLC, or AllianceOne Receivables Management Inc., on behalf of Capital One between January 18, 2008 and June 30, 2014 may be eligible for up to $40 cash. … Read More »
Capital One (TCPA) »
Defendant: Capital One
Consumers who received automatic non-emergency credit card default servicing call on their cell phones from Capital Management Systems, LP, Leading Edge Recovery Solutions, LLC, or AllianceOne Receivables Management Inc., on behalf of Capital One between January 18, 2008 and June 30, 2014 may be eligible for up to $40 cash. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
×Comerica Bank (Overdraft) »
Defendant: Comerica Bank
Consumers may be eligible for a share of a $14.5 million settlement if they were charged one or more overdraft fees due to Comerica Bank’s practice of reordering transactions. Class members will automatically receive payment or account credit no sooner than November 24, 2014. Read More »
Comerica Bank (Overdraft) »
Defendant: Comerica Bank
Consumers may be eligible for a share of a $14.5 million settlement if they were charged one or more overdraft fees due to Comerica Bank’s practice of reordering transactions. Class members will automatically receive payment or account credit no sooner than November 24, 2014.
×Volkswagen (Jetta Door) »
Defendant: Volkswagen
The lawsuit alleges that the driver door wiring harnesses and related components of certain 2005 and 2006 Jetta vehicles are defective. Consumers who purchased or leased those models may be eligible for cash reimbursement for repair expenses up to $345 and warranty extension. Read More »
Volkswagen (Jetta Door) »
Defendant: Volkswagen
The lawsuit alleges that the driver door wiring harnesses and related components of certain 2005 and 2006 Jetta vehicles are defective. Consumers who purchased or leased those models may be eligible for cash reimbursement for repair expenses up to $345 and warranty extension.
×Perrigo (Glucosamine) »
Defendant: Walgreen; Wal-Mart; Supervalu; and Perrigo Company of South Carolina
Consumers who purchased certain joint health dietary supplements containing glucosamine that were manufactured or sold by Walgreen, Wal-Mart, Supervalu, and Perrigo Company of South Carolina may be eligible for up to $12 per bottle, with maximum of 8 bottles. The companies reached a settlement over allegations of falsely advertising that… Read More »
Perrigo (Glucosamine) »
Defendant: Walgreen; Wal-Mart; Supervalu; and Perrigo Company of South Carolina
Consumers who purchased certain joint health dietary supplements containing glucosamine that were manufactured or sold by Walgreen, Wal-Mart, Supervalu, and Perrigo Company of South Carolina may be eligible for up to $12 per bottle, with maximum of 8 bottles. The companies reached a settlement over allegations of falsely advertising that the product “rebuild cartilage,” “lubricate joints,” and “improve joint comfort” when they do not provide these benefits.
×LeanSpa (Free Trial) »
Defendant: LeanSpa
LeanSpa will provide $7 million in consumer refunds to settle a Federal Trade Commission complaint regarding LeanSpa’s deceptive weight loss claims and “free trial” practices. Alleges that LeanSpa used fake websites to promote the products and made it difficult for consumers to cancel the “free trial.”LeanSpa (Free Trial) Read More »
LeanSpa (Free Trial) »
Defendant: LeanSpa
LeanSpa will provide $7 million in consumer refunds to settle a Federal Trade Commission complaint regarding LeanSpa’s deceptive weight loss claims and “free trial” practices. Alleges that LeanSpa used fake websites to promote the products and made it difficult for consumers to cancel the “free trial.”LeanSpa (Free Trial)
×Sylvania (Automotive Lighting) »
Defendant: Sylvania
Consumers who purchased certain Sylvania Automotive Lighting between September 22, 2005 and July 11, 2014 may be eligible for up to $10 cash. The company reached a settlement over allegations of falsely advertising the brightness, road visibility, and life of the bulbs. Read More »
Sylvania (Automotive Lighting) »
Defendant: Sylvania
Consumers who purchased certain Sylvania Automotive Lighting between September 22, 2005 and July 11, 2014 may be eligible for up to $10 cash. The company reached a settlement over allegations of falsely advertising the brightness, road visibility, and life of the bulbs.
×Motorola (CLIQ XT) »
Defendant: Motorola
Consumers who bought a Motorola CLIQ XT mobile phone before February 2, 2011 may be eligible for up to $25 redemption code for use at Motorola Online Store. The company reached a settlement over allegations of representing to consumers that the operating system of the CLIQ XT would be upgraded,… Read More »
Motorola (CLIQ XT) »
Defendant: Motorola
Consumers who bought a Motorola CLIQ XT mobile phone before February 2, 2011 may be eligible for up to $25 redemption code for use at Motorola Online Store. The company reached a settlement over allegations of representing to consumers that the operating system of the CLIQ XT would be upgraded, but failed to do so.
×HSBC (TCPA) »
Defendant: HSBC
Consumers who received automatic, non-emergency telephone call on their cell or landline phone from HSBC or entities working on behalf of HSBC between May 31, 2008 and May 1, 2012 may be eligible for up to $40 cash. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone… Read More »
HSBC (TCPA) »
Defendant: HSBC
Consumers who received automatic, non-emergency telephone call on their cell or landline phone from HSBC or entities working on behalf of HSBC between May 31, 2008 and May 1, 2012 may be eligible for up to $40 cash. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
×General Information Services, Inc. (FCRA) »
Defendant: General Information Services, Inc.
The lawsuit alleges that General Information Services, Inc reported expunged criminal records in background checks to employers and failed to notify individuals that their background reports was provided to employers in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Individuals who were not given notification of the report issued for employment… Read More »
General Information Services, Inc. (FCRA) »
Defendant: General Information Services, Inc.
The lawsuit alleges that General Information Services, Inc reported expunged criminal records in background checks to employers and failed to notify individuals that their background reports was provided to employers in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Individuals who were not given notification of the report issued for employment purposes between December 22, 2009 and March 1, 2014 may be eligible for up to $40. Individuals whose expunged criminal records were included in background checks that were issued between December 22, 2009 and March 1, 2014 may be eligible for up to $1500.
The court approved the settlement. If you are eligible for a payment, a check will be mailed to you.
×Nelnet Business Solutions (Telephone Recording) »
Defendant: Nelnet Business Solutions
California residents who received one or more telephone calls from Nelnet Servicing, LLC between December 18, 2011 and August 4, 2014 and was not informed that the call may be monitored or recorded may be eligible for a pro rata share of the $1 million settlement. Read More »
Nelnet Business Solutions (Telephone Recording) »
Defendant: Nelnet Business Solutions
California residents who received one or more telephone calls from Nelnet Servicing, LLC between December 18, 2011 and August 4, 2014 and was not informed that the call may be monitored or recorded may be eligible for a pro rata share of the $1 million settlement.
×Apple (e-books) »
Defendant: Apple
The lawsuit alleges that five US publishers and Apple conspired to fix prices of e-books. Consumers may be eligible for partial refunds if they purchased e-books between April 1, 2010 and May 21, 2012 that were published by the following companies: • Hachette Book Group, Inc. (“Hachette”); • HarperCollins Publishers… Read More »
Apple (e-books) »
Defendant: Apple
The lawsuit alleges that five US publishers and Apple conspired to fix prices of e-books. Consumers may be eligible for partial refunds if they purchased e-books between April 1, 2010 and May 21, 2012 that were published by the following companies:
• Hachette Book Group, Inc. (“Hachette”);
• HarperCollins Publishers LLC (“HarperCollins”);
• Simon & Schuster, Inc. and Simon & Schuster Digital Sales, Inc. (“Simon & Schuster”);
• Holtzbrinck Publishers, LLC, known as Macmillan (“Macmillan”); and
• Penguin Group (USA) Inc. (“Penguin”).
Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Kobo, Sony, and Google are providing notice and providing account credits voluntarily. None of these retailers have been sued in this case.
Consumers who purchased e-book through Amazon, Apple, Barnes & Nobles or Kobo will either automatically receive a credit to their accounts or choose to receive a check. The deadline to file an online check request is Oct. 31, 2014. Consumers who already filed a claim and received a check in the prior settlement do not need to file a claim form in the Apple Settlement.
Consumers who purchased e-book through Sony will receive a check automatically.
Consumers who purchased e-book through Google must file a claim by Oct. 31, 2014. Consumers who already filed a claim and received a check in the prior settlement do not need to file a claim form in the Apple Settlement.
The amount of the settlement depends on the outcome of Apple's appeal to the court.
×U-Prosta (active ingredient) »
Defendant: U-Prosta
California consumers who bought U-Prosta from April 13, 2010 to March 16, 2011 may be eligible for a pro rata share of the $125,000 settlement. The company reached a settlement over allegations that the supplement contained prescription medicine, which turned the supplement into an unapproved drug. Read More »
U-Prosta (active ingredient) »
Defendant: U-Prosta
California consumers who bought U-Prosta from April 13, 2010 to March 16, 2011 may be eligible for a pro rata share of the $125,000 settlement. The company reached a settlement over allegations that the supplement contained prescription medicine, which turned the supplement into an unapproved drug.
×Big 5 Sporting Goods (Zip Code) »
Defendant: Big 5 Sporting Goods
Alleges that customers were asked for a ZIP code in violation of their privacy rights between February 14, 2007 and February 23, 2011 at Big 5 stores in California. Class members may be eligible to receive either a $10 or $25 voucher for use at a California Big 5 retail… Read More »
Big 5 Sporting Goods (Zip Code) »
Defendant: Big 5 Sporting Goods
Alleges that customers were asked for a ZIP code in violation of their privacy rights between February 14, 2007 and February 23, 2011 at Big 5 stores in California. Class members may be eligible to receive either a $10 or $25 voucher for use at a California Big 5 retail store.Big 5 Sporting Goods (Zip Code)
×Door Control (Unsolicited Fax) »
Defendant: Door Control Services, Inc.
Individuals or entities that received unsolicited fax from Door Control before August 6, 2014 may be eligible for up to $30 cash. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Read More »
Door Control (Unsolicited Fax) »
Defendant: Door Control Services, Inc.
Individuals or entities that received unsolicited fax from Door Control before August 6, 2014 may be eligible for up to $30 cash. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
×