LawCash Links

Recommended

How many rebate coupons have you sent off and never heard anything again? The parties have reached a tentative $1.6 million settlement in a nationwide class action filed against defunct computer hardware manufacturer Newcom, Inc. and the retail outlets that sold Newcom products on behalf of all persons who failed to receive a promised rebate after submitting rebate documents showing that they had purchased a Newcom product. Claim forms must be received by the claims administrator by October 26, 2003, to be considered valid.

Millions of consumers have been defrauded into paying thousands extra for a so-called pre-owned Ford over the past four years when the car may have gone through the same certification as any other used car.

A statewide class action has been filed in New York against Integretel, Inc., Mercury Marketing of Delaware, Inc. and Neal Saferstein, owner of these companies. The action is brought on behalf of all New York residents who, since 1997, never agreed to pay for an Internet service, or any other service, from Mercury Marketing of Delaware, Inc., or its subsidiaries, but who have been billed by Mercury on their phone bills anyway. The consumers allege that, in agreement with local phone services providers such as Verizon Wireless, Mercury and its subsidiaries illegally piggyback fees for services that are never provided onto consumers' telephone bills. Consumers allege that Mercury and its subsidiaries have a long history of this illegal conduct and have engaged in fraud, breach of contract, breach of warranty, unjust enrichment, tortious conversion and deceptive trade practices as a result of this conduct. Additionally, the consumers allege that Mercury's subsidiary, Integretel, Inc., has violated the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by attempting to and actually collecting from consumers for these nonexistent services. The consumers are seeking compensatory damages, punitive damages, disgorgement of profits, treble damages as well as injunctive and declaratory relief.

The parties have agreed on a tentative partial settlement of $61.42 million in a class action lawsuit pending in the Contra Costa County Superior Court against the manufacturers of Cal-Shake® roofing Shakes ("Cal-Shake® Shakes"). Cal-Shake® Shakes are a fiber cement roofing product made to look like wood shakes or slate tiles. Plaintiffs allege that Cal-Shake® Shakes are defective and that the Shakes caused home damage for which Class Members should be paid. Plaintiffs are seeking payment for the cost of removing and replacing all Cal-Shake® Shakes in the state of California. The case is scheduled to go to trial in April, 2005.

Kahn Gauthier Swick, LLC (“KGS”) has filed the first class action lawsuit against China Sunergy Co. Ltd. (“China Sunergy” or the “Company”) (NasdaqGM: CSUN) in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, on behalf of shareholders who purchased the common stock of China Sunergy in connection with the Company’s IPO on or about May 17, 2007, or who purchased shares thereafter in the open market. No class has yet been certified in this action.

A judge in California certified a class action lawsuit against Verisign to proceed and to include up to 400,000 class members. The total liability exposure to Verisign may exceed 200 million U.S. dollars. The suit was filed last year in California.

IT'S FREE