Tag Archives: consumer
“Predominance” Requirement Clarified in New Seventh Circuit Decision by Judge Posner
Sears customers alleged in a class action against Sears, Roebuck and Co. that their Kenmore-brand Sears washing machines had two defects. One defect occurred in their front-loading “high efficiency” washing machines. Because of the low volume of water used in … Continue reading
Tags: breach of warranty, certification, class, class action, consumer, consumer fraud, consumer protection act, consumer protection attorney, consumer protection laws, consumer protection lawyer, consumer protection rights, consumer protection rights attorney, consumer protection rights lawyer, deceptive advertising, defective products, misleading advertising, Rule 23
Leave a comment
Update: IndyMac/OneWest Bank Denied Second Bid to Dismiss HAMP Class Action Lawsuit
On July 27, 2010, plaintiff Stacey Fletcher filed a putative class action complaint alleging that the defendant IndyMac Mortgage Servicers, FSB (a division of OneWest Bank, FSB)(“OneWest”) mishandled her application for a mortgage loan modification pursuant to the Home Affordable Modification Program … Continue reading
Tags: arbitration, billing fraud, class action, class action attorney, class action lawyers, consumer, consumer class action, consumer fraud, consumer protection act, consumer protection attorney, consumer protection laws, consumer protection lawyer, consumer protection rights, consumer protection rights attorney, consumer protection rights lawyer, deceptive advertising, HAMP, Home Affordable Modification Program, Indymac, IndyMac; mortgage; trial period, insurance, misleading advertising, misleading consumers, modification, modification loan, mortgage, mortgage loans, OneWest, predatory lending lender liability, TPP, trial period, Trial Period Plan
3 Comments
Second Circuit Determines Arbitration Provision Included in Follow-Up E-mail Not Binding on Online Purchasers
In Schnabel v. Trilegiant Corp., plaintiffs commenced a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court of Connecticut against defendants (Affinion Group, LLC, and its wholly owned subsidiary Trilegiant Corp.) who are in the business of marketing and selling … Continue reading
Tags: arbitration, Arbitration Clause, arbitration provision, billing fraud, class action, class action attorney, class action lawyers, consumer, consumer class action, consumer fraud, consumer protection act, consumer protection attorney, consumer protection laws, consumer protection lawyer, consumer protection rights, consumer protection rights attorney, consumer protection rights lawyer, deceptive advertising, enrollment, membership fee, membership program, misleading advertising, misleading consumers, monthly membership fee, online membership program, Trilegiant
Leave a comment
Featured Posts
JPMorgan Loses Bid to Prohibit Class Arbitrations
Social Media Accounts Are Fair Game in Discovery
Ninth Circuit Revives HAMP Claims Against Wells Fargo
Court Certifies Class of Rite Aid Store Managers Under Rule 23