Select an area:
Home Affordable Modification Program (“HAMP”)
The Firm represents Pennsylvania and Illinois borrowers in class action litigation against Bank of America and JPMorgan Chase alleging that the banks failed to comply with their obligations to modify borrowers’ mortgages under the federal Home Affordable Modification Program (“HAMP”). Both cases have been consolidated with other class actions filed throughout the country and are […](more)
This consumer class action arises out of Defendants’ illegal sale of “‘Premium Care’ Theft-Gard” (“PCTG”). The PCTG is an aftermarket product distributed, sold and administered by Defendant Alexico Corporation (“Alexico”). It is then sold directly to consumers by the remaining Defendants, each of which is a Pennsylvania car dealer who eitherbrokers the sale on behalf of the consumer or as […](more)
Title Insurance Cases
The defendant companies are: Chicago Title Insurance Company Conestoga Title Insurance Company Guarantee Title and Trust Company Old Republic National Title Insurance Company Stewart Title Guaranty Company Court Decisions : Chicago Title – Order – Denying Motion to Dismiss Ticor Title – Order – Denying Complaint Dismissal(more)
US Bank is a national provider of credit cards and other financial services directed at consumers through various forms of solicitation. Each card was issued with specific terms and agreements, however US Bank decided the terms were not sufficient and so they enacted a “change in terms”, specifically altering way APR was calculated. As a […](more)
Erie Insurance Litigation
This was a consumer class action in which the consumer alleged that Erie collected premiums for the time period before life insurance coverage went into effect. In particular, the action alleged that the insurance policy did not take effect until it was delivered to the insured, but that Erie received premium payments from consumers covering […](more)
Samuel v. Equicredit Corp
The Firm served as co-counsel to the plaintiff and a class of twelve thousand Pennsylvania residential homeowners who were victimized by practices and policies of a sub-prime home equity lender. Following vigorous litigation, the case settled in consideration of a $2,500,000 payment to the class, as well as substantial relief for class members whose homes […](more)
Newton v. United Companies Financial Corp.
24 F. Supp. 2d 444 (E.D. Pa. 1998) The Firm co-counseled this five day bench trial on behalf of four low-income plaintiffs against a sub-prime home equity lender for violations of the Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act and the Equal Credit Opportunity Act. Plaintiffs prevailed on virtually all their claims, achieving rescission of the […](more)
US Bank is a national provider of credit cards and other financial services directed at consumers through various forms of solicitation. Each card was issued with specific terms and agreements, however US Bank decided the terms were not sufficient and so they enacted a “change in terms”, specifically altering way APR was calculated. As a result US Bank […](more)
General Motors Plenum
This suit was initiated by purchasers of GM automobiles equipped with the 3800 series engine (VN K-RPO L36). The engine powers a multitude of GM cars engine was fitted with a faulty stove pipe manifold that lead to an increased loss of coolant, premature internal engine wear, and/or internal engine problems. These cars were purchased from 1995 […](more)
Farina v. Nokia Inc., et al.
The past 15 years have seen cell phone use evolve from a mere convenience to an all out necessity. Increased usage without proper testing of the required equipment has led to adverse reactions within the makeup of the human body. The biological harm is further manifested when a unwitting person talks on their cell phone without the […](more)
Bally’s Total Fitness
This case is a consumer class action brought on behalf of individuals who Plaintiffs allege were subjected to Defendants’ violations of the Pennsylvania Health Club Act, which regulates health clubs operating within the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law, which prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices in […](more)
Little v. Kia Motors America, Inc.
No. UNN-L-800-01 (Law Division Aug. 20, 2003) The Firm is co-lead counsel in this New Jersey class action against KIA. Similar to the Samuel-Basset case in Pennsylvania. On August 20, 2003, the New Jersey Superior Court certified a class of New Jersey consumers to pursue breach of warranty and Consumer Fraud Act claims arising from […](more)
Colbert v. Dymacol, Inc.
305 F.3d 1256 (3d Cir. 2002)(appeal vacated and dismissed, March 10, 2003) The Firm co-counseled this class action involving over 186,000 Pennsylvania consumers under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The case involved cutting edge issues involving the intersection of Rule 68 offer of judgments and Rule 23 class actions. The case was argued twice […](more)
Braun v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
2003 WL 1847695 (Pa. Com. Pl. January 15, 2003) The Firm is co-counsel to the plaintiff and class in this action to recover unpaid wages earned by Wal-Mart employees for overtime work and missed or shortened meal and break periods. Plaintiff has obtained a court ruling prohibiting Wal-Mart from conducting ex parte interviews with current […](more)
Samuel-Bassett v. Kia Motors America, Inc
212 F.R.D. 271 (E.D. Pa. 2002) The Firm is co-counsel in this class action involving 10,000 Pennsylvania consumers against Kia Motors America, Inc. The class claims arise from a systematic defective brake system in Kia Sephia automobiles, model years 1995-2001. Court Orders & Opinions: Memorandum and Order Approving Class Certification September 17, 2004 Judge Bernstein’s […](more)
Danganan v. Guardian Protection Services
Danganan v. Guardian Protection Services Plaintiff Jobe Danganan hired Guardian Protection Services to provide home security for his residence in Washington D.C. In the middle of his contract with Guardian Mr. Danganan had to move to California for work and notified Guardian that he wanted to terminate his services with them. Guardian refused to terminate […](more)
Gillis v. Respond Power, LLC
Gillis v. Respond Power, LLC This case arises from a deceptive scheme perpetrated by Defendant Respond Power LLC. Respond is an Electric Generation Supplier (EGS) in Pennsylvania that uniformly mis-portrays the contractual rates it can and will charge to consumers by omitting material facts and deceiving reasonable consumers as to the actual risks, costs, charges, […](more)
In re: Yahoo! Litigation
The firm was co-lead counsel. This case was brought about in May of 2006 against Yahoo! on behalf of pay-per-click search advertising customers who claim Yahoo! breached its contract by allowing Yahoo! ads to be displayed in spyware, domain name parking sites (also known as bulk registration sites), pop-ups, pop-unders, and typosquatting sites. After participating […](more)
Williams v. Empire Funding Corp
The Firm co-counseled this class action against a predatory lender who deprived consumers of their right to rescission under the federal Truth-In-Lending Act through the use of a deceptive “two-contract scheme” whereby a home improvement company named Fredmont Builders targeted low income areas, going door-to-door promoting a program of home improvements and repairs which the […](more)