Deadlines Calendar

« September 2018 »

S M T W T F S
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30            

View Large Calendar


Class Action by Status


'pending' Listing

Ticketmaster (Order Processing Fees) »

Defendant: Ticketmaster

Consumers who purchased tickets from ticketmaster.com from October 21, 1999 to February 27, 2013 and paid for an Order Processing Fee may be eligible for refunds.   Consumer who also purchased UPS delivery for the tickets during the class period may also be eligible for additional discounts on future UPS ticket… Learn More.

Ticketmaster (Order Processing Fees) »

Defendant: Ticketmaster
Source: http://www.ticketfeelitigation.com/

Consumers who purchased tickets from ticketmaster.com from October 21, 1999 to February 27, 2013 and paid for an Order Processing Fee may be eligible for refunds.   Consumer who also purchased UPS delivery for the tickets during the class period may also be eligible for additional discounts on future UPS ticket deliveries.  Ticketmaster reached a $403.3 million settlement over allegations of excessive and deceptive fees.

Learn More.

Tags/Keywords

×

BP Solar and Home Depot (Solar Panel) »

Defendant: BP Solar and Home Depot

Alleges that certain BP solar panels manufactured between 1999 and 2007 with S-type junction boxes are defective, creating a fire hazard.  Consumers are eligible for replacement by an approved contractor. The court approved the settlement on Dec. 22, 2016.    Learn More.

BP Solar and Home Depot (Solar Panel) »

Defendant: BP Solar and Home Depot

Alleges that certain BP solar panels manufactured between 1999 and 2007 with S-type junction boxes are defective, creating a fire hazard.  Consumers are eligible for replacement by an approved contractor.

The court approved the settlement on Dec. 22, 2016.

Learn More.

Tags/Keywords

×

Fiat Chrysler (Emissions-Cheating Software) »

Defendant: Fiat Chrysler

Alleges that Fiat Chrysler fraudulently concealed, falsely advertised, and violated consumer laws by installing software that only turns on emissions controls when the 2500 and 3500 Dodge RAM trucks are being tested and shuts down emissions controls during normal operations, releasing more pollution than allowed by law. The case is… Learn More.

Fiat Chrysler (Emissions-Cheating Software) »

Defendant: Fiat Chrysler
Source: https://www.hbsslaw.com/cases/dodge-ram-2500-emissions

Alleges that Fiat Chrysler fraudulently concealed, falsely advertised, and violated consumer laws by installing software that only turns on emissions controls when the 2500 and 3500 Dodge RAM trucks are being tested and shuts down emissions controls during normal operations, releasing more pollution than allowed by law. The case is Bledsoe et al v. FCA US LLC and Cummins Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-14024-TGB-RSW, in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan.

Learn More.

Tags/Keywords

×

Audi (Emissions-Cheating Software) »

Defendant: Audi

Alleges that Audi fraudulently concealed, falsely advertised, and violated consumer laws by installing software that only turns on emissions controls when the certain Audi vehicles with 3.0-liter gasoline engines are being tested and shuts down emissions controls during normal operations, releasing more pollution than allowed by law. The case is… Learn More.

Audi (Emissions-Cheating Software) »

Defendant: Audi
Source: https://www.hbsslaw.com/cases/audi-emissions-cheating

Alleges that Audi fraudulently concealed, falsely advertised, and violated consumer laws by installing software that only turns on emissions controls when the certain Audi vehicles with 3.0-liter gasoline engines are being tested and shuts down emissions controls during normal operations, releasing more pollution than allowed by law. The case is Greenfield et al v. Audi of America, LLC and Audi AG, Case No. 1:16-cv-10456, in the US District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.

Learn More.

Tags/Keywords

×

Ford (MyFord Touch) »

Defendant: Ford

Alleges that Ford knowingly sold defective MyFord Touch powered by SYNC operating system in certain Ford models.  The case is In Re MyFord Touch Consumer Litigation, Case No. 13-cv-03072-EMC, in the US District Court for the Northern District of California.    Learn More.

Ford (MyFord Touch) »

Defendant: Ford

Alleges that Ford knowingly sold defective MyFord Touch powered by SYNC operating system in certain Ford models.  The case is In Re MyFord Touch Consumer Litigation, Case No. 13-cv-03072-EMC, in the US District Court for the Northern District of California.

Learn More.

Tags/Keywords

×

Fiat Chrysler (Emissions-Cheating Software) »

Defendant: Fiat Chrysler; Bosch

Alleges that Fiat Chrysler fraudulently concealed, falsely advertised, and violated consumer laws by installing software that only turns on emissions controls when the certain Dodge RAM EcoDiesel and Jeep Grand Cherokee EcoDiesel vehicles are being tested and shuts down emissions controls during normal operations, releasing more pollution than allowed by… Learn More.

Fiat Chrysler (Emissions-Cheating Software) »

Defendant: Fiat Chrysler; Bosch

Alleges that Fiat Chrysler fraudulently concealed, falsely advertised, and violated consumer laws by installing software that only turns on emissions controls when the certain Dodge RAM EcoDiesel and Jeep Grand Cherokee EcoDiesel vehicles are being tested and shuts down emissions controls during normal operations, releasing more pollution than allowed by law. The case is Chavez et al v. FCA US LLC; Robert Bosch GMBH, and Robert Bosch LLC, Case No. 3:16-cv-06909, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.

Learn More.

Tags/Keywords

×

Breathometer, Inc. (Original and Breeze) »

Defendant: Breathometer, Inc.

Consumers who purchased breathometer Original or Breeze will be eligible to receive full refunds.  According to the Federal Trade Commission complaint, Breathometer falsely advertised that the breathalyzer devices could accurately calculate blood alcohol content and were “law-enforcement grade product.”  The FTC also charged Breathometer with falsely claiming its products went… Learn More.

Breathometer, Inc. (Original and Breeze) »

Defendant: Breathometer, Inc.

Consumers who purchased breathometer Original or Breeze will be eligible to receive full refunds.  According to the Federal Trade Commission complaint, Breathometer falsely advertised that the breathalyzer devices could accurately calculate blood alcohol content and were “law-enforcement grade product.”  The FTC also charged Breathometer with falsely claiming its products went through government-lab grade testing and knew that the results understated BAC levels.

Learn More.

Tags/Keywords

×

Ford (Exhaust) »

Defendant: Ford

Alleges that 2011-2015 Ford Explorer vehicles are defectively designed, allowing exhaust odor to enter into the vehicle. Consumers who purchased or leased those models may be eligible for reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses (maximum of $500). The court approved the settlement on June 21, 2017 but the approval of the Settlement… Learn More.

Ford (Exhaust) »

Defendant: Ford

Alleges that 2011-2015 Ford Explorer vehicles are defectively designed, allowing exhaust odor to enter into the vehicle. Consumers who purchased or leased those models may be eligible for reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses (maximum of $500).

The court approved the settlement on June 21, 2017 but the approval of the Settlement has been appealed.

Requests for reimbursement under the Customer Satisfaction Program must be submitted to your dealer before March 31, 2018.

Learn More.

Tags/Keywords

×

Volkswagen (3.0-liter diesel emissions) »

Defendant: Volkswagen

Volkswagen agree to buyback 3.0 liter diesel cars to settle a Federal Trade Commission complaint regarding Volkswagen’s false advertising of the emissions level of the 3.0 liter diesel Volkswagen and Audi vehicles.  Consumers who have purchased or leased those models may be eligible for a cash payment and (a) have… Learn More.

Volkswagen (3.0-liter diesel emissions) »

Defendant: Volkswagen
Source: https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/cases-proceedings/refunds/volkswagen-30l-settlement

Volkswagen agree to buyback 3.0 liter diesel cars to settle a Federal Trade Commission complaint regarding Volkswagen’s false advertising of the emissions level of the 3.0 liter diesel Volkswagen and Audi vehicles.  Consumers who have purchased or leased those models may be eligible for a cash payment and (a) have Volkswagen buy back their car or (b) accept the Approved Emissions Modification.

Deadline to register as former owner is May 1, 2017

Learn More.

Tags/Keywords

×

BMW (Takata Airbag) »

Defendant: BMW

Alleges that certain BMW vehicles have defective airbags made by Takata. Consumers who purchased or leased certain BMW vehicles between April 11, 2013 and June 9, 2017 may be eligible for residual distribution up to $250 cash or reimbursement of reasonable expenses. Final Fairness Hearing is Oct. 25, 2017.    Learn More.

BMW (Takata Airbag) »

Defendant: BMW

Alleges that certain BMW vehicles have defective airbags made by Takata. Consumers who purchased or leased certain BMW vehicles between April 11, 2013 and June 9, 2017 may be eligible for residual distribution up to $250 cash or reimbursement of reasonable expenses.

Final Fairness Hearing is Oct. 25, 2017.

Learn More.

Tags/Keywords

×

Mazda (Takata Airbag) »

Defendant: Mazda

Alleges that certain Mazda vehicles have defective airbags made by Takata. Consumers who purchased or leased certain Mazda vehicles between April 11, 2013 and June 9, 2017 may be eligible for residual distribution up to $250 cash or reimbursement of reasonable expenses. Final Fairness Hearing is Oct. 25, 2017.    Learn More.

Mazda (Takata Airbag) »

Defendant: Mazda

Alleges that certain Mazda vehicles have defective airbags made by Takata. Consumers who purchased or leased certain Mazda vehicles between April 11, 2013 and June 9, 2017 may be eligible for residual distribution up to $250 cash or reimbursement of reasonable expenses.

Final Fairness Hearing is Oct. 25, 2017.

Learn More.

Tags/Keywords

×

Subaru (Takata Airbag) »

Defendant: Subaru

Alleges that certain Subaru vehicles have defective airbags made by Takata. Consumers who purchased or leased certain Subaru vehicles between April 11, 2013 and June 9, 2017 may be eligible for residual distribution up to $250 cash or reimbursement of reasonable expenses. Final Fairness Hearing is Oct. 25, 2017.    Learn More.

Subaru (Takata Airbag) »

Defendant: Subaru

Alleges that certain Subaru vehicles have defective airbags made by Takata. Consumers who purchased or leased certain Subaru vehicles between April 11, 2013 and June 9, 2017 may be eligible for residual distribution up to $250 cash or reimbursement of reasonable expenses.

Final Fairness Hearing is Oct. 25, 2017.

Learn More.

Tags/Keywords

×

Toyota (Takata Airbag) »

Defendant: Toyota

Alleges that certain Toyota vehicles have defective airbags made by Takata. Consumers who purchased or leased certain Toyota vehicles between April 11, 2013 and June 9, 2017 may be eligible for residual distribution up to $250 cash or reimbursement of reasonable expenses. Final Fairness Hearing is Oct. 25, 2017.    Learn More.

Toyota (Takata Airbag) »

Defendant: Toyota

Alleges that certain Toyota vehicles have defective airbags made by Takata. Consumers who purchased or leased certain Toyota vehicles between April 11, 2013 and June 9, 2017 may be eligible for residual distribution up to $250 cash or reimbursement of reasonable expenses.

Final Fairness Hearing is Oct. 25, 2017.

Learn More.

Tags/Keywords

×

Nissan (Takata Airbags) »

Defendant: Nissan

Alleges that certain Nissan vehicles have defective airbags made by Takata. Consumers who purchased or leased certain Nissan vehicles and sold or returned that vehicle between November 11, 2008 and September 19, 2017 may be eligible for residual distribution up to $250 cash or reimbursement of reasonable expenses. Consumers who… Learn More.

Nissan (Takata Airbags) »

Defendant: Nissan

Alleges that certain Nissan vehicles have defective airbags made by Takata. Consumers who purchased or leased certain Nissan vehicles and sold or returned that vehicle between November 11, 2008 and September 19, 2017 may be eligible for residual distribution up to $250 cash or reimbursement of reasonable expenses. Consumers who currently own or lease certain Nissan vehicles as of September 19, 2017 may be eligible for residual distribution up to $250 cash or reimbursement of reasonable expenses.

Final Order Approving Class Settlement was entered on Feb. 28, 2018.

Learn More.

Tags/Keywords

×

Honda (Takata Airbags) »

Defendant: Honda

Alleges that certain Honda vehicles have defective airbags made by Takata. Consumers who purchased or leased certain Honda vehicles and sold or returned that vehicle between November 11, 2008 and September 19, 2017 may be eligible for residual distribution or reimbursement of reasonable expenses. Consumers who currently own or lease… Learn More.

Honda (Takata Airbags) »

Defendant: Honda

Alleges that certain Honda vehicles have defective airbags made by Takata. Consumers who purchased or leased certain Honda vehicles and sold or returned that vehicle between November 11, 2008 and September 19, 2017 may be eligible for residual distribution or reimbursement of reasonable expenses. Consumers who currently own or lease certain Nissan vehicles as of September 19, 2017 may be eligible for residual distribution or reimbursement of reasonable expenses.

Final Order Approving Class Settlement was entered on Feb. 28, 2018.

Learn More.

Tags/Keywords

×