We Handle Cases throughout the United States
800-475-2570
Harold v. Insight Health Services
Los Angeles Superior Court (Class Action). Class action on behalf of hourly employees of Insight Health Services. Employees allege that Insight Health Services failed to provide overtime compensation for hours worked in excess of eight hour per day or 40 hours per week.
Boggs v. Franchise Tax Board
Los Angeles Superior Court (Class Action). Class Action on behalf of visually impaired tax payers alleging that Franchise Tax Board discriminated against those with visual impairments by not providing alternate forms for viewing bills such as larger print or Braille. Plaintiffs claim that because Defendant did not provide easily viewed bills, they could not pay bills in a timely manner and often incurred late fees.
Kaewsawang v. Sara Lee
Los Angeles County Superior Court (Class Action). Class action on behalf of delivery drivers for Sara Lee, alleging that Defendants misclassified the drivers as independent contractors and participated in unlawful business practices including but not limited to denying workers overtime compensation for hours worked in excess of 8 per day or 40 per week and failing to provide workers with meal and rest breaks.
Gaal v. Toyota
United States District Court—Central District of California (Class Action). Class action on behalf of consumers alleging that defective inverters in Toyota Highlander HV and Lexus RX 400L vehicles cause engines to lose power while driving. If cars are no longer under warranty, drivers are responsible for the cost to fix the defective product. Drivers allege that Toyota has adopted a new warranty policy that extends the warranty period for problems with the defective inverter but has failed to notify or reimburse drivers.
Mata v. CitiMortgage
United States District Court—Central District of California (Class Action). Class action on behalf of borrowers alleging defendants are collecting payments on mortgages they have no legal right to collect.
Trebbe v. Travel Insurance
Los Angeles County Superior Court (Class Action). Plaintiffs allege that defendants sold phony travel insurance policies to thousands of Californians.
Ulman v. Central Mortgage Company
Los Angeles County Superior Court (Class Action). Class action brought against Central Mortgage alleging that Defendants intentionally failed to return refunded property tax owed to the Plaintiffs. Defendants would pay anticipated property taxes on properties it listed for sail. At closing, homebuyers would reimburse Defendants for the property taxes that they paid for the property, but when Defendants received a refund from the Los Angeles County Tax Collector’s Office, they would retain the entire refund and not reimburse the homebuyers their proportional share.
Martinez v. The Welk Group et al.
United States District Court—Southern District of California (Class Action). Plaintiff alleges that Defendants continued to market and sell time shares memberships at the Welk Resort in San Diego despite the presence of dangerous mold, mildew, and fungus in the time share units and throughout the resort.
United States District Court—Southern District of Indiana—New Albany Division (Class Action). Class action on behalf of family members of the deceased alleging that Grandview Cemetery improperly and negligently installed lawn crypts, specific types of burial vaults that encapsulate the coffin, by failing to establish proper drainage systems. Severe water damage and flooding resulted, but Plaintiffs allege that Defendants failed to notify them of these problems and did not take necessary steps to fix them. Plaintiffs further allege that on several occasions, Defendants failed to bury the decreased in lawn crypts, despite the fact that the family members paid for them.
Los Angeles County Superior Court (Class Action). Class action on behalf of tenants of apartment complexes owned by Shapell Industries, and/or operated by Topa Management or Legacy Partners, alleging that Defendants unfairly bill tenants for water, trash, and sewage. Plaintiffs complain that it is improper and unfair for Defendants to charge for water based on Ratio Utility Billing System (“RUBS”), which is an arbitrary accounting method and does not reflect the actual amount of water used by each tenant individually.
Proudly serving Los Angeles area, throughout California and nationwide. Including residents of Long Beach, Torrance, Anaheim, Santa Ana, Huntington Beach, San Bernardino, Palm Springs, Riverside, Orange, Ventura, Santa Barbara, Fresno, Bakersfield, Stockton, Chula Vista, Irvine, Glendale, Modesto, Oxnard, Oceanside, Santa Clarita, Ontario, Pomona, Malibu, Beverly Hills, Hollywood, South Bay, San Diego, San Francisco, Sacramento, Oakland, San Jose, Los Angeles County, Orange County, Riverside County, San Bernardino County, Ventura County, San Diego County, Alameda County, San Francisco County, Kern County, Santa Barbara County, Sacramento County, Santa Clara County, and Contra Costa County. Search Engine Optimization by Omnipresent SEO