Class Action Lawsuits

Denture Cream Class Action

High levels of zinc in denture cream adhesives are to blame for zinc poisoning, neuropathy, and other neurological problems, according to a denture cream class action filed in 2009.  With 35 million denture adhesive users in the United States, this denture cream class action may turn out to be a major class action.  Makers of Super Poligrip and Fixodent are both named in denture cream class actions which hinge on a 2008 study published in the jounal Neurology.

The study showed subjects who had developed neurological problems associated with zinc poisoning.  The subjects had all used large amounts of denture cream adhesive like Fixodent and Poligrip.  Poligrip is made by GlaxoSmithKline and Fixodent is made by Proctor and Gamble.  The plaintiffs in the Poligrip class action are Michael Lowe and Marlon J. Bond.  Plaintiffs in the Fixodent denture cream class action are Sandra Williams, Diane M. Bates and Retha Jones.

When denture wearers use denture adhesive cream, they may ingest zinc or absorb it through the gums and mouth.  Increased zinc levels in the body will lower copper levels, leading to neurological problems, and possibly to the user becoming disabled.  Sometimes zinc poisoning leads to a state where the user has to remain in a wheelchair for life.

Symptoms of zinc poisoning include:

• unexplained pain
• numbness
• paralysis
• tingling in the hands or feet
• dizziness
• loss of sensation
• muscle weakness
• lethargy

Since the first denture cream class action was filed in 2009 in the State of Tennessee, the makers of Super Poligrip have produced a zinc-free denture adhesive.  Plaintiffs are asking GlaxoSmithKline to pay for medical testing, medical monitoring, and treatment for zinc poisoning.  They claim that makers of denture cream failed to warn them of risks of high zinc levels in their product.  Both Poligrip and Fixodent are among the most widely used denture cream adhesives.

New BP class action lawsuit Seeks punitive Damages

In yet another BP oil spill lawsuit, Corliss Gallo is standing for plaintiffs who are suing for punitive damages in a BP class action lawsuit.  BP and other companies involved with the Macondo oil well in the Gulf, which suffered a leak last April 2010, are named as defendants in the BP class action lawsuit, which was filed August 20, 2010.  The other companies are Halliburton, Transocean LTD, and Cameron International.

Corliss Gallo et al. will seek punitive damages based on alleged gross negligence which harmed their property, as well as negligence during cleanup efforts which left property trampled.  Corliss Gallo owns property on Grand Terre Island and claims his land was degraded by the BP oil spill, and further degraded by workers during the cleanup efforts after the spill.

Punitive damages are a controversial topic when it comes to oil spills.  After the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill, some Alaska fishermen and others were awarded $5 billion in punitive damages by a court.  Later, the Supreme Court reduced the punitive damages to $507 million.  $507 million was the amount of actual, compensatory damages suffered by the plaintiffs.  In other words, the Supreme Court at the time was laying rules dictating a one-t0-one ration between compensatory damages and punitive damages.

The Supreme Court in that case stated that only when reckless profiteering, or reckless behavior in order to increase profits, would a higher ratio be granted.  That ration is three to one, punitive to compensatory damages.  And that is what is being sought in the current BP class action lawsuit this month.

The big question is whether the three-to-one ratio for punitive damages will be warranted in this particular BP class action lawsuit.  Lawyers on the Plaintiffs’ side will have to show egregious behavior for profit.  Reports from the US Coast Guard and Congressional hearings will be used to show that defendants took risks and didn’t fix equipment in order to make a quick buck.

Oil spill class action lawsuit

It’s getting hard to keep the oil spills and related class action lawsuits straight these days.  Now there’s an oil spill class action lawsuit in Michigan, with Enbridge Inc. named defendant.  Their pipeline between Michigan and Canada sprang a leak this month, and leaked oil along twenty  miles of the Kalamazoo River in South Central Michigan.  Residents along the river were told not to drink or cook with their well water, and those who lived in the immediate area of the spill were told to evacuate.

Now, in their oil spill class action lawsuit, these residents are suing the Canadian energy company, but the works are still in the preliminary stages.  Enbridge Inc, or Enbridge Energy, has been named before in class action lawsuits. Noxious fumes are coming from the river, and officials worry about lasting health problems.  The wetlands around the Kalamazoo River are also in danger from the leaked oil.

Enbridge was warned by the US Environmental Protection Agency seven months ago about the conditon of the pipeline.  It seems that corrosion levels did not meet Federal standards.  They’ve been warned, cited and fined several times in the last decade, according to some reports. This is not their first oil spill class action lawsuit.

More than 800,000 gallons of oil have spilled into the Kalamazoo River, which became polluted last month after this oil spill.  This Michigan oil spill is the worst in Midwest history. The pipeline carries oil from Western Canada into the United States.

A state of emergency was declared in the area, and skimmers and booms were deployed immediately in the area to control the oil spill.  The area is located in south central Michigan, with Lake Michigan at the western end of the Kalamazoo River.  Officials currently believe the oil will not reach the Lake.

Walmart Class Action

The Walmart Class Action was filed in April 2010, when it was allowed to proceed as a class action.  The original Walmart lawsuit was filed in 2001, over alleged gender discrimination against women employees.  About one million women in the United States may be part of the Walmart class action, which exposes Walmart to billions of dollars of potential loss.  Walmart asked the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to remove the class action status, but to no avail.  The landmark case against Walmart will now proceed with the class action status in courts.  Walmart says it will appeal again, this time to the Supreme Court.

The suit alleges that Walmart gives women fewer promotions and pays them less.  Walmart is the world’s largest retail store, and the United States’ largest private employer.  The case affects women who’ve worked in Walmart stores since 2001.  A lower court is also deciding whether women who worked at Walmart from 1998 to 2001 can also be included in the Walmart Class Action lawsuit.  There are more than three thousand Walmart stores in the United States alone.  Walmart tried unsuccessfully to undo the class action status, which is considered a big victory for the plaintiffs.

Walmart has tried hard in the last decade to upgrade its image with the public.  They’ve engaged in several high-profile public relation projects, like improving the eco friendly aspects of the businness, and helping with disaster relief efforts.

It’s interesting to note that the six judges who ruled in favor of establishing the case as a Walmart class action were appointed by Democratic presidents, while the five who ruled against where appointed by Republicans.

Experts in class action law agree that if the class action status sticks, Walmart will under tremendous pressure to settle the case.

Fen-phen Progression Claim

Diet drug Fen-Phen, or fenfluramine, was banned in the United States in 1997.   A Fen-Phen class action lawsuit was filed and won by plaintiffs, and now the Fen-Phen progression claim is entering its final phase.  For those who are unfamiliar with the term “progression claim”, it’s for:

• people who registered for the claim in a timely manner
• those who used Fen-Phen
• people whose conditions have progressed to a point where they may need extra compensation

To  become part of the Fen-Phen progression claim, it’s extremely important to pay attention to deadlines, since they tend to be very strict for these types of claims.

Fen-Phen was popular in the 1990s, and approved by the FDA in 1996, even though the chief medical officer refused to sign the approval.  Another FDA officer approved the drug, just a year before studies showed that women taking the drug developed .  Dr. Heidi Connelly of the Mayo Clinic, reporting in  The New England Journal of Medicine in August 1997, linked her patients taking Fen-Phen with pulmonary hypertension and heart-valve abnormalities.  Fen-Phen was banned: Pondimin and Redux, brand names for Fen-Phen, produced by American Home Products were recalled from the shelves.

Fen-Phen cost American Home Products $3.75 Billion in the end, and Fen-Phen progression claims continue to this day.

BP Benzene Class action lawsuit

BP oil giant has been named in another class action lawsuit, this time in its Texas City oil refinery.  The BP Benzene lawsuit claims BP released Benzene and other harmful chemicals and both workers and residents in the area were exposed to these toxic substances.  This lawsuit was filed August 3, just after BP announced it had capped the oil leak in the Gulf, which had caused the company billions of dollars in an oil spill class action lawsuit.

The suit alleges that benzene was released into the atmosphere, causing harm to just over 2200 plaintiffs, which include workers and residents who claim they’re suffered serious illness and injury due to exposure to benzene.  The benzene was supposedly released from the refinery near Galveston, which suffered an breakdown on April 6.  The breakdown occurred in a hydrogen compressor at the plant, and allegedly caused benzene to be released into the air.

Benzene has been linked to serious health problems like leukemia, cancer, and other life-threatening health issues.  It’s a known carcinogen.

BP, formerly known as British Petroleum, runs the Texas City Oil Refinery, which is the third largest in the United States.  The refinery has been the subject of several major safety concerns.  In 2005, an explosion and fire at the refinery killed 15 workers.  The refinery has already been the subject of a class action lawsuit, over safely issues discovered during inspections after the 2005 fire.  They were ordered to set up better pollution controls and to fund a clean air project for Texas City.

The BP benzene lawsuit could have similar outcomes, including fines, upgrades, and public programs.

Facebook Like Buttons Lawsuit

Facebook is facing yet another class action lawsuit, this time over its “Like” buttons.  The Facebook like buttons lawsuit alleges the site uses pictures of minors for commercial gain, without parental permission.  The class action was filed in Los Angeles, California today, August 28, 2010 on behalf of David Cohen and Shelby Orland, minors, and their guardians.  Facebook will content that the nature of “Like” buttons and how they’re used is in the terms of the Facebook agreement, which every user must electronically “sign” in order to get a Facebook account.

But the loophole lies in California law, which is very specific about using names and images of minors for profit.  To use a minor’s name or likeness for advertising, one must get the parent’s consent in order to get the minor’s consent.  Plaintiffs are arguing that Facebook did not get parental permission, so getting minors’ permission doesn’t count for anything.

As seen in another Facebook class action lawsuit, Facebook states it will vigorously fight the allegations.  One possible outcome of this Facebook class action is that minors, or those under eighteen, might have to get parental permission to sign up for a Facebook account.  Parents would then be giving permission for their images and names to be used to advertise products and the Facebook website itself.

It’s claimed in the Facebook class action lawsuit that search engines come into play when someone searches on a name.  A link to their facebook page will come up in the search results, encouraging the user to sign up for an account.   In a nutshell, that illustrates how Facebook is using teenagers’ names to advertise itself.

Reglan Use is Said to Cause Tardive Dyskinesia

Reglan tardive dyskinesia lawsuits are being consolidated into class action suits in New Jersey and other states.  Reglan and its generic version, metoclopramide, are drugs maufactured and prescribed for relief of gastrointestinal problems.  Reglan aids in contractions of the upper digestive tract, helping to move food through the system more quickly.  Reglan was approved by the FDA for use over short periods of time, up to twelve weeks.  However, because of recurring nature of the gastrointestinal difficulties suffered by patients on Reglan, doctors often prescribe Reglan or metoclopramide for longer periods of time.

Disorders for which Reglan is taken include gastroesophageal reflux,  gastroparesis, and delayed gastric emptying among others.  These disorders can return time and time again.

Reglan has serious health side effects about which plaintiffs allege they were not warned.  Reglan class action lawsuits are brought by patients who took Reglan and consequently suffered from Reglan tardive dyskinesia symptoms.   Tardive dyskinesia is a condition in which involuntary movements of the head, arms or legs, or ticks, become regular in the person suffering the symptoms.  The reglan side effects can last way beyond the period of time during which Reglan was taken, even much longer after Reglan use has ceased.

Reglan tardive dyskinesia lawsuits are consolidating in multiple states, including New Jersey, the latest to consolidate the cases.   Consolidation means that only one court will have to familiarize itself with the complex medical and legal aspects of the reglan tardive dyskinesia lawsuit.  A judge familiar with pharmaceutical lawsuits was chosen for the reglan class action.

Defective Chinese Drywall Used in Florida Homes is at Center of a Class Action Lawsuit

In a Florida class action lawsuit that names manufacturers and distributors of defective Chinese drywall, plaintiffs allege that the product caused damage to homes, property values, and health.  Around 8,000 to 10,000 homes built between 2004 and 2006 in Florida are included in affected property in Florida.  This is the date range during which the construction industry experienced a drywall shortage and began importing defective drywall from China.

Defendants named in the Chinese drywall class action lawsuit are Knauf Group, the German parent company of KPT; Knauf Plasterboard Tianjin (KPT), a Chinese drywall manufacturer; Rothchilt International Ltd., a China-based exporter, and Banner Supply, a Miami building supply company.  The drywall class action is named on behalf of Shane M. Allen and Nicole J. Allen, who hail from the Fort Myers area.

The class action lawsuit alleges that the Chinese drywall was defective because it was manufactured using waste from Chinese power plants.  This waste material is called fly ash, and emits sulfur compounds into homes made with the defective drywall. Sulfur emissions in the form of sulfur dioxide and hydrogen sulfide caused health problems in the houses’ inhabitants, as well as electrical damage, corrosion of AC units and wiring.

Health problems include respiratory ailments, nosebleeds, sinus problems, coughing, and irritation of eyes and throat.  Plaintiffs seek damages and compensation from loss due to property devaluation, home and appliance repair and replacement, and medical testing for health problems stemming from the defective Chinese drywall.

Riot Police at the G20 in Toronto in June

Toronto Police and the federal Attorney General in Canada are named in a G20 class action lawsuit over wrongful arrests in June.  The 45 million Canadian dollar suit is brought by representative for the plaintiff, Sherry Good.  Ms. Good claims she and hundreds of others present at the protests against the G20 Summit were detained for hours and arrested without cause amidst chaos during protests that turned violent.

Violence during the otherwise peaceful G20 protests was initiated and mostly carried out by a relatively small group of people, dressed all in black and wearing black balaclavas.  This group smashed windows of small businesses, banks and coffee shops, and in some cases did some looting as well.  They also targeted at least three police cars in different sections of the city, in some cases setting them on fire.  In one case, a windshield was smashed and molotov cocktail thrown through the hole.

Ms Good, along with nearly 800 plaintiffs in the G20 class action lawsuit say they were not violent, and had nothing to do with the violence but were targeted for detention and arrest nevertheless.  They are suing the Toronto Police Services Board, who oversees the Toronto Police.  They are also suing the federal Attorney General, who legally represents the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.