return to current cases home

Consumer Protection

Wen Haircare Products

Friedman, et al. v. Guthy-Renker LLC, et al., Case No. 2:14-cv-06009-ODW (U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California).

This case concerns allegations of severe hair loss and scalp irritation resulting from use of Wen haircare products. The products are manufactured and sold by one of the largest direct marketing firms in the world, Guthy-Renker, as well as WEN by Chaz Dean, Inc. Defendants’ advertising indicates that the product is safe and that consumers cannot use too much or leave the product in too long. To the contrary, many consumers have experienced extreme and abnormal hair loss of one-quarter to one-third of their hair, despite using the product as directed.

A preliminary settlement approval hearing is set for August 1, 2016.

If you have experienced any of these symptoms please complete the WEN Intake Form  and send to apeck@cuneolaw.com.

2006 Subaru B9 Tribeca

Hadley, et al. v. Subaru of America, Inc., Civil Action No. 1:2015-cv-07210 (U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey).

CGL has filed a case against Subaru of America, Inc., alleging that the 2006 Subaru B9 Tribeca has a dangerous defect which causes the hood to fly open, damaging the windshield and blinding the driver, placing the passengers, other motorists, and pedestrians at risk. Despite numerous complaints about this issue, Subaru has not issued a recall or warned the owners of the thousands of Subaru Tribecas which may be subject to the same defect.

Shortly after the lawsuit’s filing, Subaru announced an international recall of the affected model. Case negotiations are ongoing.

If you are the owner of a 2006 or 2007 Subaru Tribeca and would like to discuss your rights of recovery, whether you have experienced this defect or not, you may, without any cost or obligation, call Benjamin D. Elga at (202) 789-3960, or email him at belga@cuneolaw.com.

Debit Card Overdraft Fees

In Re: HSBC Bank USA, N.A. Debit Card Overdraft Fee Litigation, Case No. 2:13-md-02451-ADS-AKT (U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York); In re HSBC Bank U.S.A., N.S., Checking Account Overdraft Litigation, Case No. 650562/2011 (New York Supreme Court).

Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP, and three other firms, were appointed as Co-Interim Lead Counsel for Plaintiffs challenging HSBC Bank USA, N.A.’s practices of reordering debit transactions from high-to-low and not processing transactions chronologically in order to increase the bank’s overdraft fee revenue by millions of dollars per year.  Plaintiffs alleged that HSBC unlawfully concealed these procedural changes from customers.

After overcoming a motion to dismiss and conducting extensive discovery, plaintiffs’ counsel filed class certification papers in federal court on January 30, 2015.  While that class certification motion was pending, HSBC reached a settlement with the parties to the parallel but previously dormant action in the New York state court.  On February 10, 2016, the Federal Plaintiffs and all parties to the State Action reached a settlement agreement and a hearing on the Motion for Final Approval of the Proposed Class Action Settlement was held on April 6, 2016.

For additional information, please contact attorneys Jonathan Cuneo or Jennifer E. Kelly at 202-789-3960, or by email at jonc@cuneolaw.com or jkelly@cuneolaw.com.

APPLE STORAGE LITIGATION

Orshan v. Apple Inc., Civil Action No. 5:14-cv-05659 (U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California).

This case concerns allegations that the iOS 8 operating system on certain Apple devices consumes a substantial portion of the total available storage on the devices.  The complaint asserts that Apple provides consumers materially less storage than they are promised and then aggressively markets iCloud storage space, which it sells on a monthly basis.  The case concerns both devices with iOS 8 pre-installed and devices in which iOS 8 is installed by way of update. Click here to read the complaint.

The motion to dismiss is fully briefed and the parties are awaiting a ruling from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

For additional information, please contact attorneys Charles LaDuca or William Anderson at 202-789-3960, or by email at charles@cuneolaw.com or wanderson@cuneolaw.com

Deceptive Energy Contracts

Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP has filed lawsuits against third party energy suppliers Ambit Energy, LLC, Viridian Energy, LLC, Smart One Energy, LLC, HIKO Energy, LLC, and XOOM Energy, LLC in New Jersey, Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina.

The complaints allege that the Defendants engage in deceptive bait-and-switch sales models with variable rate customers. These companies represent to potential customers that if they switch from their local utility companies or other energy suppliers, they will receive low introductory rates on their energy bills followed by competitive market based rates and savings. However, shortly after consumers switch their energy supply, their electric and gas rates actually increase, causing substantially higher energy bills.

If you have switched to a third party energy provider with the promise of energy cost savings, only to have the price you pay for electricity or gas increase substantially, please contact attorneys Charles LaDuca or Beatrice Yakubu at (202) 789-3960, or by email at charles@cuneolaw.com or byakubu@cuneolaw.com.

In re Whole Foods Market, Inc., Greek Yogurt Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation

Knox, et al. v. Whole Foods Market Group, Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-13185 (U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts).

This case concerns false representations of nutritional information by Defendants regarding 365 Greek Yogurt. Specifically, despite representations that the yogurt at issue contains only two grams of sugar per serving, an investigation by Consumer Reports found that in six different tests the actual sugar content averaged 11.4 grams of sugar per serving—nearly six times the stated amount.

Motion to dismiss briefing is complete, and this multi-district litigation is ongoing.

For additional information, please contact attorney William Anderson at 202-789-3960, or by email at wanderson@cuneolaw.com.

TimberTech

Gornstein v. TimberTech, et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-12409 (U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts).

This case concerns defective XLM decking manufactured by TimberTech and sold throughout the United States. The defective decking, made of all polyvinyl chloride (PVC), is subject to fading (turning white) and scorching (turning black), among other problems. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants have failed to honor their warranties to customers to replace decks manufactured with defective and substandard materials.

A proposed settlement has received preliminary approval from the court, and the final approval hearing is scheduled to occur on August 4, 2016.

For additional information, please contact attorney William Anderson at 202-789-3960, or by email at wanderson@cuneolaw.com.

Yamaha F Series Outboard Motors

Williams, et al. v. Yamaha Motor Corp., U.S.A., Case No. 2:13-cv-05066-BRO-VBK (U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California).

This case concerns severe corrosion in certain first generation Yamaha F series outboard motors. The defect in the motors results in severe corrosion in the dry exhaust portion of the motor, which can ultimately lead to engine failure. The complaint alleges that Defendant knew of the defect for years and failed to inform consumers, while simultaneously profiting from sale of a kit that contained the exact defective parts at issue. Despite the fact that growth of the corrosion is ongoing, but hidden, during the warranty period, Defendant has refused to honor its products and provide repair or replacement for its consumers.

The case was dismissed and is now on appeal before the Ninth Circuit.

For additional information, please contact attorney William Anderson at 202-789-3960, or by email at wanderson@cuneolaw.com.

Living Social Gift Certificate Litigation

We have filed several lawsuits across the country against Living Social, a Washington, D.C.-based company, for violating state and federal laws that prohibit or limit expiration dates on gift certificates. Since it opened, Living Social has sold and issued millions of gift certificates for various products and services with expiration dates that were much shorter than required by law.

For additional information, please contact attorney Charles LaDuca at 202-789-3960 or by email at charles@cuneolaw.com.

UPDATE: A settlement of more than $7.5 million was approved by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.

Groupon Gift Certificate Litigation

Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP has filed federal lawsuits in the District of Columbia, Minnesota and Illinois against gift certificate wholesaler Groupon, Inc. (“Groupon”) for violating state and federal laws that prohibit or limit expiration dates on gift certificates. For several years, Groupon has sold and issued thousands of gift certificates for various products and services with expiration dates. Pursuant to state and federal law, companies cannot sell gift certificates subject to an expiration date of any kind. The plaintiffs in the lawsuits reasonably seek to recover the money they lost as a result of Groupon’s alleged illegal conduct, money for the expected value of the gift certificates they purchased, and prevent Groupon and its retail partners from selling gift certificates with illegal expiration dates.

For additional information, please contact Charles LaDuca or William Anderson at 202-789-3960, or by email at charles@cuneolaw.com.

UPDATE: A proposed settlement of $8.5 million was approved by the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. The settlement is currently on appeal.

x close window Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP
SUBMIT
disclaimer