Class Action by Status
'closed' Listing
Barney’s (Kobe Beef) »
Defendant: Barney’s
California consumers who purchased any menu item that was advertised to contain “Kobe” beef between October 3, 2008 and January 27, 2014 may be eligible for $10 or $15 gift card to Barney’s Beanery. The company reached a settlement over allegations of falsely advertising “Kobe” beef as containing beef from… Read More »
Barney’s (Kobe Beef) »
Defendant: Barney’s
California consumers who purchased any menu item that was advertised to contain “Kobe” beef between October 3, 2008 and January 27, 2014 may be eligible for $10 or $15 gift card to Barney’s Beanery. The company reached a settlement over allegations of falsely advertising “Kobe” beef as containing beef from the “Wagyu” bloodline of cattle in the Kobe region of Japan.
×Cinépolis Luxury Cinemas (FACTA) »
Defendant: Cinépolis Luxury Cinemas
Consumers who conducted credit or debit card transactions at Cinépolis Luxury Cinemas in California and received an electronically-printed receipt that contained the expiration date or more than the last five digits of the consumer’s credit or debit card between July 1, 2011 and June 30, 2013 may be eligible to… Read More »
Cinépolis Luxury Cinemas (FACTA) »
Defendant: Cinépolis Luxury Cinemas
Consumers who conducted credit or debit card transactions at Cinépolis Luxury Cinemas in California and received an electronically-printed receipt that contained the expiration date or more than the last five digits of the consumer’s credit or debit card between July 1, 2011 and June 30, 2013 may be eligible to receive $10.75 voucher. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act.
×Honeywell (Round Thermostat) »
Defendant: Honeywell
California consumers who purchased Honeywell Round Thermostat from June 30, 1986 December 5, 2013 may be eligible for up to $18 per product. Vermont consumers who purchased Honeywell Round Thermostat from June 30, 1986 to October 31, 2011 may be eligible for up to $18 per product. The company reached… Read More »
Honeywell (Round Thermostat) »
Defendant: Honeywell
California consumers who purchased Honeywell Round Thermostat from June 30, 1986 December 5, 2013 may be eligible for up to $18 per product.
Vermont consumers who purchased Honeywell Round Thermostat from June 30, 1986 to October 31, 2011 may be eligible for up to $18 per product. The company reached a settlement over allegations of using deceptive practices to overcharge customers.
Buffalo Bills Inc. (Text Message) »
Defendant: Buffalo Bills Inc.
Consumers who subscribed to the Buffalo Bills text service and received more than five texts in a week between September 12, 2008 and January 15, 2014 may be eligible for up to $75 BBI debit card. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection… Read More »
Buffalo Bills Inc. (Text Message) »
Defendant: Buffalo Bills Inc.
Consumers who subscribed to the Buffalo Bills text service and received more than five texts in a week between September 12, 2008 and January 15, 2014 may be eligible for up to $75 BBI debit card. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
×Hi‐Tech Pharmacal Co., Inc (Sinus Buster) »
Defendant: Hi‐Tech Pharmacal Co., Inc
Consumers who bought Sinus Buster products between March 7, 2012 and February 20, 2014 may be eligible for a refund or up to $5 cash. The company reached a settlement over allegations of falsely advertising the efficacy of the products. Read More »
Hi‐Tech Pharmacal Co., Inc (Sinus Buster) »
Defendant: Hi‐Tech Pharmacal Co., Inc
Consumers who bought Sinus Buster products between March 7, 2012 and February 20, 2014 may be eligible for a refund or up to $5 cash. The company reached a settlement over allegations of falsely advertising the efficacy of the products.
×Shoe Show (FACTA) »
Defendant: Shoe Show
Consumers who conducted credit or debit card transactions at Shoe Show retail locations and received an electronically-printed receipt that contained the expiration date or more than the last five digits of the consumer’s credit or debit card between June 3, 2008 and August 27, 2013 may be eligible to receive… Read More »
Shoe Show (FACTA) »
Defendant: Shoe Show
Consumers who conducted credit or debit card transactions at Shoe Show retail locations and received an electronically-printed receipt that contained the expiration date or more than the last five digits of the consumer’s credit or debit card between June 3, 2008 and August 27, 2013 may be eligible to receive either $35 voucher or $7 voucher. The company reached a settlement over allegations of violations of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act.
×Bank of America (Mortgage Interest) »
Defendant: Bank of America
Alleges that Bank of America’s failure to report option adjustable rate mortgage (“Option ARM”) borrower’s Payments of Deferred Interest on Form 1098 for Tax Years 2009 to 2012 caused borrowers to overpay their taxes. Consumers who had an Option ARM between 2009 and 2013 and made Payments of Deferred Interest… Read More »
Bank of America (Mortgage Interest) »
Defendant: Bank of America
Alleges that Bank of America’s failure to report option adjustable rate mortgage (“Option ARM”) borrower’s Payments of Deferred Interest on Form 1098 for Tax Years 2009 to 2012 caused borrowers to overpay their taxes. Consumers who had an Option ARM between 2009 and 2013 and made Payments of Deferred Interest to the IRS may be eligible for at least $40. Consumers who made Payments of Deferred Interest in Tax Year 2009 may be eligible for 75% of the tax deduction value of the deferred interest payments. Consumers who made Payments of Deferred Interest in Tax Years 2010, 2011, or 2012 will receive amended Forms 1098 and $40 per form for the consumer to amend the tax return.
×Schell & Kampeter, Inc. (Diamond Pet Foods Recall) »
Defendant: Schell & Kampeter, Inc.
Consumers who bought certain pet food products in 2011 and 2012 may be eligible for reimbursement and reasonable veterinary expenses. The company reached a settlement over allegations of manufacturing and distributing certain pet food products that led to illness and death of some animals after consumption. Read More »
Schell & Kampeter, Inc. (Diamond Pet Foods Recall) »
Defendant: Schell & Kampeter, Inc.
Consumers who bought certain pet food products in 2011 and 2012 may be eligible for reimbursement and reasonable veterinary expenses. The company reached a settlement over allegations of manufacturing and distributing certain pet food products that led to illness and death of some animals after consumption.
×Popchips »
Defendant: Popchips
Consumers who purchased certain Popchips products between January 1, 2007 and November 14, 2013 may be eligible for up to $1 cash per Popchips bag with maximum of 10 bags or two $1 voucher per Popchips bag with maximum of 10 bags. The company reached a settlement over allegations of… Read More »
Popchips »
Defendant: Popchips
Consumers who purchased certain Popchips products between January 1, 2007 and November 14, 2013 may be eligible for up to $1 cash per Popchips bag with maximum of 10 bags or two $1 voucher per Popchips bag with maximum of 10 bags. The company reached a settlement over allegations of falsely advertising the product as “all natural.”
×Banana Boat (UltraMist) »
Defendant: Banana Boat
Consumers who purchased certain UltraMist products between January 2010 and October 2012 may be eligible for up to $20 cash or vouchers for replacement Banana Boat® sunscreen products. The company reached a settlement over allegations of failure to adequately compensate consumers for the lost value of the sunscreen products after… Read More »
Banana Boat (UltraMist) »
Defendant: Banana Boat
Source: https://eclaim.kccllc.net/caclaimforms/BBC/home.aspx
Consumers who purchased certain UltraMist products between January 2010 and October 2012 may be eligible for up to $20 cash or vouchers for replacement Banana Boat® sunscreen products. The company reached a settlement over allegations of failure to adequately compensate consumers for the lost value of the sunscreen products after a voluntary market withdrawal of UltraMist Products.
×FitFlop Footwear »
Defendant: FitFlop USA, LLC
Consumers who purchased certain FitFlop footwear from January 1, 2007 and January 8, 2014 may be eligible for up to $100 cash. The company reached a settlement over allegations of falsely advertising that its products provided benefits that ordinary footwear did not provide. Read More »
FitFlop Footwear »
Defendant: FitFlop USA, LLC
Consumers who purchased certain FitFlop footwear from January 1, 2007 and January 8, 2014 may be eligible for up to $100 cash. The company reached a settlement over allegations of falsely advertising that its products provided benefits that ordinary footwear did not provide.
×Telebrands (Pocket Hose) »
Defendant: Telebrands
Consumers who bought the Pocket Hose between November 6, 2009 and January 30, 2014 may be eligible for up to $20 cash per product purchased. The company reached a settlement over allegations of false or deceptive advertisements. Read More »
Telebrands (Pocket Hose) »
Defendant: Telebrands
Consumers who bought the Pocket Hose between November 6, 2009 and January 30, 2014 may be eligible for up to $20 cash per product purchased. The company reached a settlement over allegations of false or deceptive advertisements.
×Trader Joe’s (“All Natural” Products) »
Defendant: Trader Joe's
Consumers who purchased certain Trader Joe’s “All Natural” products from October 24, 2007 to February 6, 2014 may be eligible for up to $39.99 cash. The company reached a settlement over allegations of falsely advertising the product as “all natural.” Read More »
Trader Joe’s (“All Natural” Products) »
Defendant: Trader Joe's
Consumers who purchased certain Trader Joe’s “All Natural” products from October 24, 2007 to February 6, 2014 may be eligible for up to $39.99 cash. The company reached a settlement over allegations of falsely advertising the product as “all natural.”
×JPMorgan Chase (Forced-Placed Insurance) »
Defendant: JPMorgan Chase
JP Morgan Chase agreed to a $300 million settlement. The lawsuit alleges that JP Morgan Chase forced consumers to purchase unnecessary expensive hazard insurance. The bank received kickbacks from the insurers for choosing the more-expensive policies for the homeowners. Borrowers who paid for overpriced hazard insurance premiums issued by certain… Read More »
JPMorgan Chase (Forced-Placed Insurance) »
Defendant: JPMorgan Chase
JP Morgan Chase agreed to a $300 million settlement. The lawsuit alleges that JP Morgan Chase forced consumers to purchase unnecessary expensive hazard insurance. The bank received kickbacks from the insurers for choosing the more-expensive policies for the homeowners. Borrowers who paid for overpriced hazard insurance premiums issued by certain insurance companies between January 1, 2008 and October 4, 2013 may be eligible to receive back 12.5% of the premium.
×Artic Glacier (Packaged Ice) »
Defendant:
Consumers in certain states who purchased packaged ice between January 1, 2001 and March 6, 2008 may be eligible to receive $6 cash. The companies reached a settlement over allegations of price fixing. Read More »
Artic Glacier (Packaged Ice) »
Defendant:
Consumers in certain states who purchased packaged ice between January 1, 2001 and March 6, 2008 may be eligible to receive $6 cash. The companies reached a settlement over allegations of price fixing.
×