Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLP
Shepherd, Finkelman, Miller & Shah, LLP
866-540-5505 877-891-9880

Dedicated Client Advocacy

Posts tagged "class action"

Judge Narrows Claims Ford Must Face In Class Action Over Allegedly Defective Sunroofs

On January 16, 2018, Judge Ronald B. Leighton, of the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington, ruled that Ford Motor Company ("Ford") must face some of the claims in a proposed class action over allegedly defective sunroofs that can spontaneously shatter.

Logistics Company Proposes $2.9M Settlement To End Employment Class Action

On January 10, 2018, supply chain company, Geodis LLC ("Geodis"), announced a proposed deal in which it will pay approximately $2.9 million to settle employment claims brought against Ozburn-Hessey Logistics LLC ("Ozburn-Hessey") ("Defendant"), which was acquired by Geodis in 2015.

United Airlines Sued Under Illinois Biometrics Law

On Tuesday, November 7, 2017, a class of employees led by former United baggage handler, David Johnson (collectively, the "Plaintiffs"), sued United Airlines Inc. ("United" or "Defendant") under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act ("BIPA"). The suit claims United's timekeeping system, which requires employees to clock-in and clock-out using their fingerprints, does not comply with BIPA regulations.

$1.95M Settlement In Class Action Against Moët Granted Preliminary Approval

On Tuesday, November 14, 2017, Alameda Superior Court Judge Brad Seligman gave preliminary approval to a proposed $1.95 million settlement to resolve a class action against Moët Hennessey USA ("Moët") and Strategic Experiential Group ("SEG") (collectively, the "Defendants") over alleged employee misclassification.

Supreme Court Divided Over Class Waiver Ban

The Supreme Court began its fall 2017 term with three consolidated cases concerning Epic Systems Corp., Ernst & Young, and Murphy Oil USA Inc. (collectively, "the Companies"). The Companies require pre-employment agreements forcing employees to waive their right to pursue class action relief. Several justices are questioning the legality of this practice, worried that it contradicts the spirit of federal labor law.

Wyndham To Pay $1.5M To Settle Wisconsin Overtime Wage Dispute

On Wednesday, November 1, 2017, a class of employees led by Thomas Bitner (collectively, the "Plaintiffs") asked the Honorable William M. Conley, of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, to approve a $1.5 million settlement for claims that Wyndham Vacation Resorts Inc. ("Defendant" or the "Employer") had a policy of requiring employees to perform work off the clock, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA").

Court Allows Defective Brake Class Action Against Hyundai to Continue

On Friday, September 29, 2017, U.S. District Judge Thomas P. Griesa of the Southern District of New York allowed a proposed class action over an alleged brake defect in certain Hyundai Sonata sedans against Hyundai Motor America ("Defendant") to move forward. The Court found that although some of the drivers' claims should be thrown out, others deserve to proceed.

Yahoo Battling off Class Action Lawsuits

On Friday, September 23, 2016, Yahoo Inc. ("Yahoo" or the "Company") was hit with three proposed class action lawsuits, two in California and one in Illinois, just one day after the Company announced it had been hacked in 2014. The Company revealed that over 500 million people had their personal information, including names, passwords, security questions and answers, dates of birth, email addresses, and telephone numbers stolen from Yahoo's online database. The Company believes that the hack was executed by a state-sponsored actor - in other words, an unidentified foreign government.

Uber Drivers Appeal Lower Court's Decision Requiring Them to Arbitrate Wage Claims

A proposed class of drivers appealed the lower court's decision requiring them to arbitrate their wage claims on an individual basis against the ride-hailing company, Uber Technologies Inc. ("Uber" or the "Company"). Specifically, U.S. District Court Judge James S. Moody Jr. rejected all three arguments made by the drivers, that: (1) the arbitration clause was unconscionable; (2) the provision requiring drivers to split the cost of arbitration was unlawful; and (3) the forum selection provision was unlawful. Coming before the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, the drivers have now argued that the Federal Arbitration Act ("FAA") bars the arbitration clause in the user agreements.

Class Definition in SunTrust ERISA Lawsuit

Between mid-2007 and early 2011, SunTrust Banks ("SunTrust" or the "Company") was accused of improperly handling its employees' 401(k) plan by purchasing its own common stock with the employees' retirement funds. Given the large stake in the subprime housing market (one of the main contributors to the Great Recession), SunTrust's employees filed a lawsuit in mid-2008, alleging that the Company's actions were imprudent and that it breached its Employment Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA") fiduciary duties, which require SunTrust to act solely in the interests of the 401(k) plan members. The employees further claimed that SunTrust breached its fiduciary duties by failing to disclose how it was using the employees' retirement savings.