Consumer Class Actions

After 8 years of litigation, several national cases involving consumer claims for damages by FBB&C’s clients against AT&T Wireless have been coordinated before a single Federal Court Judge for approval of settlement of all cases. To our knowledge, this is the first time multiple claims filed in different courts have been coordinated before one judge. This strategic decision was made by FBB&C to provide greater value to FBB&C’s clients. More Info

Claims involve Verizon’s consumer billing practices for its Family Share wireless services program. Verizon Wireless has in excess of 55,000,000 nationwide subscribers.

National putative class action relating to the way Verizon charges for wireless data services. Filed in New Jersey, FBB&C has been appointed by the Court as interim co-lead counsel, pending final designation as permanent lead counsel. Verizon Wireless has in excess of 55,000,000 nationwide subscribers.

This California class action alleged that flaws in GTE/Verizon’s billing system resulted in consumers being substantially over-billed for long distance calls. After over 3 years of litigation with FBB&C, GTE agreed to pay $20,000,000 to settle the case.

This national class action alleged that prior to May 2003, when a customer of AT&T cancelled wireless service, AT&T’s uniform practice was always to “pro rate” the monthly service charge -- charging the customer only through the date of cancellation of service. AT&T, in the face of rapidly defecting subscribership, implemented a uniform company policy of not pro rating but instead charged its customers for a full billing cycle in the month in which the cancellation took place. It was alleged that this practice violated the existing terms and conditions of its Customer Service Agreements.
In the midst of the grueling class action battle, AT&T attempted to settle the case with another group of law firms who had filed a similar action in the Superior Court of New Jersey for just over $2 million. After a New Jersey judge had preliminarily approved the $2 million settlement, FBB&C alleged, amongst other things, that the proposed settlement was inadequate. FBB&C ultimately persuaded the Court that the settlement reached in the New Jersey action did not adequately compensate the class. In a well-reasoned, 11-page decision, the Honorable Judge Bernstein of the Essex County, New Jersey Superior Court concluded that “the settlement was unfair.” Shortly after the decision, AT&T approached FBB&C in an attempt to reach a more adequate settlement. In a remarkable turnaround and as a result of FBB&C’s efforts, the New Jersey court ultimately approved a revised settlement valued at over $47,000,000. More Info

This class action lawsuit alleged that T-Mobile's practices of charging their customers for calls dialed to their cellular telephones while their customers were outside the United States, even though their customers never received or made the calls for which they were billed, was wrongful. After several lengthy battles regarding the forum of the dispute and after defeating attempts by T-Mobile to dismiss the class action, the case ultimately settled. The settlement reached on behalf of the entire class, which was approved by both the San Diego Superior Court and the Arbitrator, required T-Mobile to pay benefits to the class members valued at approximately $4,448,000. More Info

This class action lawsuit alleged that certain Verizon Yellow Pages print directories were not timely distributed to the public, and therefore, advertisers in the Directories received less than a full year of advertising. Verizon agreed to pay benefits to the class members valued at approximately $1,570,000.

This California class action lawsuit alleged that Bank of America failed to properly or timely record a legally-required document known as a deed of reconveyance for over 500,000 customers who had paid-off or refinanced their home loans with Bank of America. After several years of protracted litigation, Bank of America agreed to change its business practices to ensure timely recordation of the deeds and paid $4,375,000 to settle this case.

FBB&C defended Weekend Warrior relating to a mass consumer recall of allegedly defective recreational trailers. FBB&C strategized the defense such that Weekend Warrior settled the case in favor of the consumers without any cost to Weekend Warrior (including attorneys fees and costs) and, in fact, Weekend Warrior saw a financially positive result in settling the case.

FBB&C defended Darkside Productions, an internet-based advertising company, relating to claims that their category–specific advertising rates were gender discriminatory. FBB&C strategized the defense and made several key motions to the Court that resulted in a quick and financially advantageous settlement of this matter.