Consumer Rights Class Actions
Consumer fraud undermines our entire economy, hurting consumers and honest business competitors alike. Often, these wrong actions, whether false advertising, deceptive trade practices, or unfair conduct, target an entire group of consumers. Consumers, by joining together in a class action, can use the law to punish wrongdoers and receive compensation. We have obtained numerous high value multi-million dollar awards for the classes in many of our suits.
Ku & Mussman represents clients in consumer rights class actions in uncovering and stopping unfair trade practices. Whether the problem is a poor product, misleading advertising, or using fine print to take advantage of consumers, legal remedies exist to address these and other situations. In partnership with some of the most well renown law firms in the country, Ku & Mussman has successfully prosecuted numerous consumer rights class actions and obtained multi-million dollar results on behalf of the class. Below are some of the highlights of our work. More detailed descriptions may be found on our Notable Results page.
Class actions are not limited to consumer claims. Successful class actions have been brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act, Fair Housing Act, and Fair Labor Standards Act, among others. If you have been treated unfairly by a company or feel cheated in a business transaction, no matter what size your loss, there is something you can do about it.
Consumer Rights Class Actions: Settlements and Awards
Smith et al. v. Intuit, Inc., No. 12-222 (N.D. Cal filed Jan. 13, 2012) (national class action filed on behalf of TurboTax users alleging breach of California’s RAL, usury laws and unfair trade practices in the imposition of fees related to tax preparation services. Settlement reached for the class of $6,550,000.00).
Barba et al. v. Shire U.S., Inc. et al., No. 13-21158 (S.D. Fla. filed Apr. 2013). Plaintiffs alleged that the drug manufacturer illegally extended its patent protection to deprived consumers of less expensive generic competition. The case settled for $14,750,000.00 and final approval was granted by the Court in November 2016.
Patterson v. JTH Tax, Inc., No. 11-62472 (S.D. Fla. filed Nov. 17, 2011) (class action representing Florida purchasers of Liberty tax preparation services alleging deceptive trade practices in the imposition of rapid access loan fees. Consolidated under Multi-district Litigation, MDL No: 2334. The consolidated matter was later settled for $5,300,000.00 for the class).
Triplett v. Discover Bank, MDL No. 2217 (N.D. Ill. filed Feb. 15, 2011) ($10,500,000 preliminary settlement reached on behalf of national class of purchasers against Discover Bank alleging breach of contract and unfair trade practices in the marketing and administration of credit card “Payment Protection”).
In re: Dollar General Corp. Motor Oil Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, MDL No. 2709 (W.D. Mo. filed Dec. 2015). (On March 21, 2019, Court approved Class certification for consumers in 16 states involved in the lawsuit. The matter was ultimately settled for $28,500,000.00 and final approval was granted by the Court in June 2021).
Kardonick v. JP Morgan Chase & Co., No. 10-23235 (S.D. Fla filed Sep. 8, 2010) ($20,000,000.00 preliminary settlement reached on behalf of Florida purchasers against Chase Bank alleging breach of contract and unfair trade practices in the marketing and administration of credit card “Payment Protection”).
In re: Budeprion XL Sales and Marketing Litigation, MDL No. 2107 (E.D. Pa. filed Aug 10, 2009) (multidistrict class action representing purchasers alleging fraud and misrepresentation against manufacturers of generic form of Wellbutrin XL) (Defendants who manufacture and distribute the drug, have agreed to injunctive relief consistent with federal regulations to ensure that the key practices complained of in this litigation permanently cease, providing a substantial benefit to the purchasing public. The measures include removing allegedly misleading labeling information, further disclosure of the drug’s testing procedures, monitoring the investigation of consumer complaints, improving quality control and publishing information on future voluntary recalls).