|
Search
Search through the thousands of lawsuits, complaints and recalls on our site.
 |
Case ID: 4465 | Miscellaneous | 10/10/2005
Cincinnati Bengals fans who say the team improperly refused to allow them to cancel their season tickets have asked a judge to award their lawsuit class action status.
A lawyer representing several people involved in the dispute asked Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Robert Ruehlman to allow anyone who purchased tickets based on a 1997 brochure to join the lawsuit. The conflict involves fans who bought seat licenses sold to raise money for construction of the new Paul Brown Stadium based on the brochure, which allowed buyers to lock in prices for six, eight or 10 years. Fans signed an agreement acknowledging they gave up their seat license if they stopped buying tickets. However, a second document that arrived with the seat assignments said the fans were obligated to keep buying tickets through the full term of the license, and that disputes must go to arbitration. The fans sued the team after it sent them letters threatening to turn their cases over to collections agencies, which the fans said could jeopardize their credit ratings. "The Bengals were trying to collect a total of $5.8 million, which is not a trivial amount of money." The Bengals are strong-arming people to collect the money," a lawyer for the fans stated. The lawyer representing the Bengals, told Judge Ruehlman that when the plaintiffs picked a time period, they were agreeing to buy tickets for that long, which was reflected in the prices. Ruehlman said he will issue a decision Oct. 7. The stadium opened in 2000. The Bengals had losing records the first three years before finishing 8-8 the past two years. At Lawcash.com, it is our goal to keep you informed about important legal cases, class actions and settlements. Our lawyers offer free legal evaluations in tort cases, class actions, personal injury, and other lawsuits because we are dedicated to helping you resolve your legal complaints. Other Miscellaneous Cases of Interest A California jury as reached a nearly $1 billion verdict in a class action filed against Bank of America, NA, on behalf of Californian Social Security recipients who had their direct deposit accounts tapped to pay the bank overdraft and other charges between August 1994 and December 2003. The action alleged that the bank violated state law by assessing the charges even though the recipients’ Social Security payments were directly deposited into their accounts. No money will be distributed until all appeals have been exhausted. Las Vegas attorneys filed a class action lawsuit filed on behalf of hundreds of Vegas Grand condominium purchasers against the developers of the Vegas Grand condominiums, citing the developers unilaterally cancelled the purchasers' agreements in a letter April 25, 2005. The class action lawsuit was was expanded on May 27, 2005 by the filing of a First Amended Complaint, adding new legal theories to the case against developers of the Las Vegas property. A class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors who traded in gold commodities between January 1, 1998 and the present against gold mine operator Barrick Gold Corporation and investment brokerage giant JP Morgan Chase & Co. The suit alleges that JP Morgan Chase and Barrick manipulated the gold market and artificially affected gold prices, to the financial harm of investors. The parties have reached a $16 million settlement in a class action filed against energy provider Cleco Corporation on behalf of 264,000 electricity customers across Louisiana. The action alleged that the utility improperly engaged in "round-trip trades" involving power sales from Cleco affiliates to an unnamed trading partner, who then sold the power back to another Cleco affiliate. Persons eligible to take part in the settlement may contact the Louisiana Public Service Commission for more information. American Express Financial Advisors (AEFA), a division of American Express, was served August 1, 2005 with a motion that asked Federal Court in Arizona to certify a class of more than 500,000 former AEFA clients. The motion was filed by leading plaintiffs attorneys in Arizona. In the Class Certification motion, the former clients allege that AEFA violated fiduciary duties and perpetrated a scheme to defraud its investing clients through the Company's sale of Financial Plans. A class action lawsuit has been filed in the District Court of Maryland against Hien Thi NGO for violations of The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. Commonly referred to as "RICO", the Act addresses the infiltration of legitimate businesses by organized crime. Class members seek $150,000 in actual and compensatory damages in legal fees and costs, $300,000 for emotional distress, pain and suffering, $500,000 for damages to businesses and $9,000,000 in punitive damages. |
IT'S FREE
|
© 2000 - 2008 Copyright. All rights reserved nola3, llc.
