Class Action Lawsuits
Mobile, Alabama
Carter v. First Tennessee Bank, Civil Action No.97-3894 in the Circuit Court of Fayette County, Tennessee.
This case involved improprieties in the financing of home satellite systems. A multi-state litigation class was certified, following which the case settled on a multi-state, classwide basis. Recovery per class member varied according to a schedule approved by the court. Taylor Martino, P.C. served as lead class counsel. Although W. Lloyd Copeland was not personally appointed by the Court as class counsel, he performed substantial legal research, writing and analysis in this case.
Hunter v. Bank One, Dayton, N.A., et al, in the Circuit Court of Fayette County, Tennessee, Civil Action No. 98-3948.
This case involved improprieties in the financing of home satellite systems. A multi-state litigation class was certified, following which the case settled on a multistate, classwide basis. Recovery per class member Varied, with a maximum classwide recovery of $26 million, exclusive of attorney's fees, costs and settlement expenses, which were paid directly by Bank One; additionally, Bank One agreed to cease future door-to-door financing of home satellite equipment, which plaintiffs contended had undue potential for deceptive practices. Taylor Martino, P.C. served as lead class counsel. Although W. Lloyd Copeland was not personally appointed by the Court as class counsel, he performed extensive legal research, writing and analysis in this case.
Mitchell v. H & R Block, Inc., et al.,in the Circuit Court of Mobile County, Alabama, Civil Action No. CV-95-2067.
This action asserted claims for breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty involving H & R Block's Refund Anticipation Loan (“RAL") program. An Alabama-only, statewide litigation class was certified. While this case was pending on H & R Block's appeal of class certification, the appeal was stayed pending settlement efforts. Mitchell, along with Green v. H & R Block, a Maryland class action, was then combined with Cummins v. H & R Block, a West Virginia class action, Civil Action No. 03-C-134 in the Circuit Court of Kanawha County, for settlement purposes in the West Virginia courts in 2006. The proceedings in West Virginia involved a contested Fairness Hearing wherein the settlement was approved over objections. Each Alabama class member who filed a claim received a payment several times larger than the RAL license fee payment at issue in the case. Lloyd Copeland was appointed class counsel by the Alabama court for the litigation class, and appointed as class counsel by the West Virginia court for the settlement class.
Carnegie v. Household International, Inc., et al., in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, Case No. 98 C2178.
This case arose out of claims of wrongdoing associated with H & R Block's Refund Anticipation Loan ("RAL") program. A national litigation class was certified asserting claims for RICO and breach of contract. The case was subsequently settled on a national, classwide basis, after full preparation for trial. The maximum recovery per class member was $125 per RAL obtained from H & R Block, depending on the number of claims filed. Total recovery for the class of over 1.7 million members was $39 million. Steve Martino and Lloyd Copeland of Taylor Martino, P.C. were among several co-counsel for the plaintiff. Lloyd Copeland performed innumerable research, writing and analytical tasks in this litigation, and participated in most important decisions regarding the litigation, from 200 I until the settlement was finally effectuated in 2007 when the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals involuntarily dismissed the appeal of the last objector to the settlement. In approving the settlement, the District Court had this to say about the attorneys representing the plaintiff:
"Since counsel took over the representation of this case following the rejection of the first settlement [when the class was represented by different counsel], they have pursued this case, conducting discovery, hiring experts, preparing for trial, filing motions where necessary, opposing many motions, and representing the class with intelligence and hard work. They have obtained an excellent result for the class."
Carnegie v. Household Intern., Inc., 445 F. Supp. 2d 1032, 1038 (N. D. Ill. 2006).
Johnson, et al. v. Texaco, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. CV-97-004127, CV-01-00 1516 (consolidated cases), in the Circuit Court of Mobile County, Alabama.
This case challenged the underpayment of royalties on gas substances produced from the Hatter's Pond Unit, alleging excessive deductions for processing costs, fees, and expenses. A multi-state litigation class was certified. Subsequently, the case settled on a classwide basis for over $1,600,000, plus future relief for the royalty owners in the form of reduced cost deductions in calculating royalties. Lloyd Copeland was appointed by the court as class counsel in this case.
Moye, etc, et al. v. Exxon Corporation, et al., in the Circuit Court of Monroe County, Alabama, Civil Action No. CV -98-20.
This case challenged the underpayment of royalties on gas substances produced from the Big Escambia Creek Field, alleging excessive deductions for processing costs, fees and expenses. A multi-state litigation class was certified. Subsequently, the case was settled on a classwide basis for $10.5 million, plus future relief for the royalty owners whereby a valuation methodology was imposed that resulted in increased royalty payments on natural gas liquids, as well as ensuring that gas substances would not be undervalued for royalty payment purposes as a result of affiliate sales. Taylor Martino, P.C. served as lead class counsel. When objectors moved the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama to enjoin the Moye settlement, Lloyd Copeland prepared an application for intervention in the federal case, which was granted, prepared the response to the motion for an injunction, and orally argued the same. The federal court denied the objectors' requested injunctive relief, in Flowers, et al. v. ExxonMobil Corporation, Civil Action No. CV05-CO-02317-W (order entered on Dec. 14, 2005).
Burgman, etc., et al. v. Mission Petroleum Carriers, Inc., in the Circuit Court of Mobile County, Alabama, Civil Action No. CV-05-4418.
This action arose out of a toxic chemical spill from an overturned tanker truck wherein state and local authorities ordered a mandatory evacuation of the surrounding area. Plaintiffs brought claims on behalf of businesses for lost profits, on behalf of employees of businesses for lost wages, and on behalf of residents for expenses incurred in connection with the evacuation. A settlement class was certified, and the settlement was approved by the court. Under the settlement, each business and employee which filed a claim received double his, her, or its actual damages; each resident who filed a claim received double damages calculated under a schedule approved by the court. Lloyd Copeland was appointed by the court as class counsel in this case.
Trice v. Union Oil Co. of California, in the Circuit Court of Mobile County, Alabama, Civil Action No. CV-98-89 and CV-2001-1517 (consolidated cases).
This case challenged the underpayment of royalties on gas substances produced from the Chunchula Field Unit, because of excessive deductions for processing costs, fees and expenses. Settlement negotiations followed extensive motion practice and the court's announcement that it intended to deny the defendant's motion for summary judgment. A multistate settlement class was certified and the settlement was approved by the court. The total classwide recovery was over $1.9 million, plus future relief for the royalty owners in the form of reduced cost deductions in calculating royalties. Lloyd Copeland was appointed by the court as class counsel, and also acted as lead counsel in the litigation and settlement negotiations.
Holman v. Patina Oil and Gas Corporation, et al., in the District Court of Weld County, Colorado, Case No. 02 CV 9.
This case was brought on behalf of a class of royalty owners alleging underpayment of royalties for gas substances produced from the Wattenberg Properties, because of excessive deductions for processing costs, fees and expenses. Following extensive motion practice, the case was settled on a classwide basis. Taylor Martino, P.C. served as co-counsel for the class, and Lloyd Copeland took an active role in legal research, writing and analysis.
J. Skelton, et al. v. Central United Life Insurance Company, Civil Action No. CV-2008-900178 in the Circuit Court of Mobile County, Alabama.
This case alleged the underpayment of benefits provided in supplemental cancer insurance policies. The policies obligated Central United to pay policyholders a benefit in the amount of the "actual charges" for chemotherapy, radiation and blood used in the treatment of cancer. The case further challenged Central United's practices concerning constant increases in premiums for its policies, which was causing increasing numbers of policyholders to lapse their policies due to unaffordability. A national settlement class was certified and the settlement approved over objections. The centerpiece of the classwide relief consisted of an 86% target loss ratio imposed on Central United by the final judgment, which is actuarily predicted to significantly decrease the frequency and extent of future premium increases for the class as a whole. Classwide relief also included monetary payments tailored to the different circumstances of class members depending on whether they had been paid "actual charges" benefits in the past and had in-force policies or had lapsed their policies. Lloyd Copeland was appointed by the court as class counsel.
Coady, et al. v. Central United Life Insurance Company, Case No. 5291 in the Circuit Court of Fayette County, Tennessee.
This case involves the alleged underpayment of benefits pursuant to "Persistency Bonus and Withdrawal Benefit Riders" issued or assumed by Central United. A multistate settlement class was certified and the settlement approved after the objection of the lone objector was stricken for lack of standing. Classwide relief consisted of monetary payments tailored to the different circumstances of class members with lapsed or cashed-in riders, in-force but not matured riders, and fully matured riders, plus a two-year premium freeze for in-force riders. The court's judgment approving the settlement is not yet [mal, and settlement administration has not yet begun. Lloyd Copeland was appointed by the court as class counsel.
Wanda Greenwood, et al. v. Compucredit Corporation, et al., Civil Action No. 4:08-cv-4878 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
This case arises out of deceptive marketing and solicitation practices for a subprime credit card. Plaintiffs assert a claim for the violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law (“UCL”) on behalf of a California-only class. The UCL class has been certified, class notice has been given, and discovery is nearing completion. The trial date in January of 2011 has been continued and has not been reset. Our firm is class co-counsel for the UCL class. This action also asserts a claim for deceptive credit and marketing and solicitation practices in violation of the federal Credit Repair Organizations Act (“CROA”) on behalf of a national class. The Defendants’ Motion to Compel Arbitration was denied by the federal district court, and that ruling was recently upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Defendants have announced their intention to seek certiorari review in the United States Supreme Court. If that is unsuccessful, on remand my law firm will serve as class co-counsel for the national CROA class. Estimated recovery for the California-only UCL class could range from $18,000,000 to $30,500,000. There are over 80,000 California class members. The number of members of the national CROA class has not been ascertained because no discovery has been undertaken; the case was stayed pending appeal of the arbitration ruling. There should be hundreds of thousands of members of the national CROA class, with a potential recovery of hundreds of millions of dollars.
Ozetta Hardy, et al. v. Cornerstone Community Outreach, Inc., et al., Civil Action No. 2:10-cv-573-MHT, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama.
This case asserts a class claim under an Alabama statute which provides that anyone who loses money participating in illegal gambling can recover the money lost by an action filed within six months after the loss. Plaintiffs’ contention is that electronic bingo machines located at an entertainment center in Lowndes County, Alabama, constitute illegal gambling under Alabama law and therefore that the class members are due to have their losses repaid to them under the Alabama statute. A class has not been certified and discovery has only just begun. Our law firm is co-counsel, and if a class is certified, we will be class co-counsel. There appear to be several thousand class members with a potential monetary recovery ranging from over $7,000,000 to almost $8,000,000.
Ozetta Hardy v. IGT, et al., Case No. 2:10-cv-901-WKW, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Alabama.
This case asserts a class claim under an Alabama statute which provides that anyone who loses money participating in illegal gambling can recover the money lost by an action filed within six months after the loss. The action is brought on behalf of all customers of Alabama casinos operated by the Poarch Band of Creek Indians, and is brought against the owners and lessors of electronic bingo machines played in those casinos. Plaintiff contends that the electronic bingo machines are illegal gambling under Alabama law and therefore are not authorized under federal law to be played in Indian casinos. This case has just been filed and discovery has not yet commenced. No class is certified. Our law firm is presently co-counsel, and if a class is certified, our law firm will be class co-counsel. The number of class members is unknown at this time but is estimated to consist of tens of thousands of people, and the potential recovery is also unknown, but could run as high as hundreds of millions of dollars.
