Meco, et al. v. International Medical Research, Inc. dba Botaniclab, et al.

Los Angeles Superior Court (Class Action) filed seeking reimbursement and restitution on behalf of thousands of rheumatoid arthritis and prostate cancer patients who purchased and consumed adulterated herbal supplements (nutraceuticals) manufactured and distributed by the defendants.  Obtained settlement in excess of several millions of dollars.

Alfred v. DOE Corporation, et al.

Los Angeles Superior Court (Class Action) in defense of a corporation and related individual defendants in a class action lawsuit alleging that defendants violated provisions of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA"). Specifically, defendants are alleged to have transmitted unsolicited advertisements via facsimile machine without prior permission from recipients.  This matter was settled while avoiding potential liability in the millions of dollars.

U.S. Green Card Lottery Facilitators, Inc. v. Card Service International, Inc., et al.

Los Angeles Superior Court (Class Action) on behalf of credit card merchants alleging that defendants concealed or failed to adequately disclose how to utilize credit card security services, thereby increasing the likelihood of fraudulent transactions, and consequently, “charge backs” for which defendants charged unreasonable fees.  Class Action settlement was reached which allowed merchants to receive monetary compensation.

Sauceda v. United Autocare Center, LLC, et al. ['Midas']

Los Angeles County Superior Court - CCW (Class Action): Midas, a nationwide auto-repair chain specializing in mufflers and brakes, sells Midas-brand brake pads and shoes (sometimes described as "Midas VSD" [vehicle specific design]) to its customers. However, although customers pay for the Midas-brand brake and believe they are receiving that specific, premium brake pad or shoe with a lifetime guarantee, Midas franchises actually install an undisclosed, unapproved brake pad or shoe. While Midas prohibits its franchisees from selling non-Midas brakes without explicit, written authorization, Midas nevertheless knowingly permits its franchisees to sell non-Midas brake pads and shoes but describe them as Midas-brand brake pads and shoes. The proposed putative class consists of all California consumers who purchased what were described as Midas-brand brakes but were, in fact, an undisclosed substitute. Relief sought includes injunctive relief aimed at ending Midas’ fraudulent practices and the return of all monies paid to Midas and its franchisees for the falsely designated, non-Midas brake pads.  Discovery leading to class certification is process.

Harder v. Blue Cross of California

Los Angeles Superior Court (Class Actions) filed on behalf of Dentists who contracted under a particular plan with Blue Shield of California won a settlement for $5,000,000 as a result of Blue Shield of California’s failure to market the plan.

Rolnik v. AT&T Wireless Services, Inc.

Superior Court of New Jersey: Essex Division (Class Action) filed in an effort to recover damages for defendant’s failure to prorate the monthly service fees charged to its customers during their final month of service prior to termination. The case was settled in 2005 for cash and Cash Equivalent Calling Cards totaling more than $49 million.

Stern v. AT&T Mobility Corporation

U.S.D.C., Central District of California. AOG served as Class Counsel in this action representing a certified class of cellular telephone customers seeking to recover damages for the imposition of inadequately disclosed service fees. The case was settled in 2009-2010. Under the terms of the settlement, the potential recovery for the class was more than $38 million in cash benefits.

Ralphs Great Escape Cases

Los Angeles County Superior Court (Class Action). This class action sought damages, penalties, and injunctive relief on behalf of hundreds of thousands of Ralphs Club Members who qualified for an award under the “Ralphs Great Escape” promotion but were denied the award. A settlement was reached with Ralphs by which thousands of affected Ralphs customers received coupons for groceries valued at approximately the value of the weekend trip promised by the botched promotion.

Thompson v. Viva America

Defendants misrepresented the composition and contents of various vitamins and supplements to hundreds of purchasers. Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants defrauded the consumers. Obtained significant settlement with total value to class members in excess of $3,200,000 and injunctive relief for Plaintiffs.

Komai v. TelePro

Residents sought compensatory damages and injunctive relief against cable provider for improperly charging excessive late fees to its customers. Settlement resulted in all fees improperly charged being reimbursed to the cable subscribers.