Class action lawsuit results - Past cases by a California law firm

Alexander Hawes, LLP, an AV-rated trial firm, has concentrated its practice on the prosecution of complex Personal Injury and Class Action cases. The Firm represents individuals, governmental entities, businesses and institutional shareholders in auto accident cases, insurance claims, motorcycle injury accidents, and truck (and SUV) accidents. In addition, our law firm represents consumers in defective product, product liability, tort, negligence, mass tort, consumer, construction defect, investment fraud, price fixing and employment cases. The Firm is currently involved in complex cases pending in federal and state courts throughout the Unites States. The Firm is dedicated to quality representation of its clients and prides itself on aggressive advocacy of its clients' claims.

While the "past is prologue," these case reports, show the depth and breadth of our experience in serious and complex cases.

Because facts differ from case to case, so do results. For that reason, this report does not constitute a promise, prediction or guarantee regarding the outcome of any future case.

Many law firms agree to represent a client. We go one step further.

We promise our best efforts to obtain the best result possible. Such results are listed here.

Alexander Hawes, LLP

Some of our past class action litigation includes:

Arsenic. Sutter Creek, California, population 2,000, is the location of the Central Eureka Mine, a closed gold mine site and an 11 acre pile of mine tailings containing arsenic upon which a new subdivision was built. We represented 40 property owners in the Mesa del Oro neighborhood of Sutter Creek in an action against the owner of the mine, Allied Signal. The lawsuit, filed in April, 1995 in Amador County Superior Court, sought compensation for property damage and nuisance. Arsenic is a known carcinogen but in its native form of arsenopyrite is not bioavailable until crushed to sand in the extraction process and then exposed to water and air on the tailings pile, next to which these homes were built. Total recovery for 40 property owners was $2,000,000. For details on the Mesa del Oro, see Time Magazine, September 25, 1995, Arsenic and Old Mines, page 36. See San Francisco Daily Journal, page 1, April 2, 1998, California Environmental Reporter, page 52, May, 1998. Loux v. Allied Signal, Amador County, 95-7198.

Bausch & Lomb Contact Lenses. A court-approved settlement of a consumer class action settlement against Bausch & Lomb was announced on August 1, 1996. Under the settlement Bausch & Lomb will pay up to $68 million in cash and products to 1.5 million buyers of the company's disposable lenses. Many wearers will receive from $25 to $50 in cash and $25 to $50 in coupons under the settlement as a result of a class-action filed in May 1994 which alleged that the company sold the same product under different brand names at widely varying prices and engaged in a fraudulent marketing scheme in order to gain market share in the disposal lens market. The result was that some consumers paid much more because they believed they were getting different lenses. Roberts v. Bausch & Lomb, Inc.,U.S. District Court, Northern District of Alabama, Western Division, No. CV-94-C-1144-W. See Wall Street Journal, November 2, 1994 and August 2, 1996 [B-2]. For full details see "Contact Lenses: Settlement of Bausch & Lomb Lens Wearer Class Action" in the articles section of our web page.

Chrysler Minivans. We are one of eight firms in the United States that filed suit seeking correction of defective rear hatch door lock failures in nominal impacts for 3,300,000 owners of Chrysler minivans. Actions were filed in Santa Clara County Superior Court, U. S. District Court for the Northern District of California, and state courts in New York, Louisiana, Texas and Alabama. Because door locks are not subject to any federal motor vehicle safety standard, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration had limited authority to force a recall absent Chrysler's willingness to do so. Chrysler announced a "service action" and its intention to replace all such locks on March 27, 1995 the day before our motion for class certification was set to be heard in Santa Clara County Superior Court. These related class actions resulted in a negotiated settlement under which Chrysler became contractually bound to all owners of 1984 through 1995 Chrysler minivans to replace existing rear hatch door locks. Chrysler estimates that the total cost of this contractual recall is approximately $120,000,000. Mann v. Chrysler Corporation Santa Clara County Superior Court Action number CV 746017. The provisional settlement agreement of July 21, 1995 was given final approval by Judge Charles A. Legge on November 30, 1995, Stuart Hanlon, et al v. Chrysler Corporation, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, Civil Action No. C 95-2010 CAL. Despite several objections, Judge Legge held that the settlement was "fair, reasonable and adequate." See The Recorder, December 1, 1995, page 1; San Francisco Daily Journal, December 1, 1995, page 1.

GE Light Bulbs. In Plotkin v. General Electric, Alexander Hawes, LLP led the nation in charging General Electric with defrauding the American public in the sale of Energy Choice Light Bulbs which were claimed to be energy efficient, required less electricity and would preserve the environment. In actuality, the 100 watt replacement bulb was simply a dimmer 90 watt bulb and was sold for twice the price of a standard 100 watt bulb. Embarrassed by the public exposure of misconduct, General Electric readily settled this national class action. Forty-four million Energy Choice Light Bulbs sold over a two year period. Settlement provides for national reimbursement by special coupons to all consumers refunding overcharges. Plotkin v. General Electric, U.S District Court, Northern District of California, Action No. C-92-4447, Honorable Barbara Caufield. See San Francisco Chronicle, October 28, 1993, page 2.

Air Crash. Statewide Committee of Plaintiffs' Attorneys for the December 7, 1987 USAir/PSA Flight 1771 Air Disaster litigation.

Ford Taurus. In Evarkiou v. Ford Motor Company, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, No. C-93-0844-SAW, an action on behalf of a proposed nationwide class of 429,000 owners of 1988-91 3.8 Liter Ford Taurus, Mercury Sable and Lincoln Continental, we sought relief as a result of power steering hoses that were prone to rupture due to a design defect resulting in loss of steering and possibly fires. This action sought recovery for property damage and injunctive relief. Discovery established that engine fires were caused by improper service work that resulted in dislocation of the power steering hoses and improper repositioning by mechanics. In a unique settlement, in which no class member released any claim, Ford agreed to issue a Technical Service Bulletin addressing this problem and to sell power steering hoses only in special boxes containing the TSB, all appropriate warnings and installation instructions with the appropriate heat shield and tie straps at a 30% discount. In addition the TSB was issued to all dealers and associations of mechanics. Total value of the benefit conferred is approximately $2,000,000.

Nissan Minivans. $200,000,000 estimated total recovery for 33,000 owners of 1987-90 Nissan minivans which were the subject of three recalls because of engine failures and fires before Alexander Hawes, LLP filed suit in April 1993. On February 2, 1994, one week before the hearing on plaintiff s motion to certify a national class action, Nissan negotiated a settlement of the class action, stipulated to the certification of a national class, and resolved a federal investigation by the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration by voluntarily agreeing to an unprecedented buy back of 33,000 vans at fair market value [$5,000 to $7,000]. Johnson v. Nissan Motor Company Inc., U.S.A., Santa Clara County Superior Court No. 730558. Wall Street Journal, February 4, 1994, page A2. San Jose Mercury, C1, San Francisco Chronicle, A5.

Radioactive Gravel. In federal court in Columbus, Ohio we sued a nuclear waste facility for distributing slag that has a low level of radioactivity which exceeds that allowed by the Nuclear Regulatory Agency. The slag is a waste product from the production of metal alloys by Cypress Foote Mineral from the 1950s to the 1970s. In December, 1996 the Court approved a settlement under which 120 properties were tested, 11 had low level radioactive slag removed and the balance were determined to be safely contained primarily in dirt driveways where the material had migrated deep into mud and mixed with steel mill slag and other rock material. Although radon was not associated with the slag, homes were tested for radon and those having radon exceeding the EPA standard were provided with radon exhaust equipment, as part of the settlement. Radon is naturally occurring in this area of Ohio. Payments to homeowners ranged from $5,000 to $40,000. The clean-up under the settlement was paid by Cypress Foote Mineral.

Toxic Tort. $180,000,000 Final Settlement. The Richmond Toxic Cloud class action litigation, Contra Costa County Superior Court, arose from the explosion of a tank car of oleum, concentrated sulfuric acid and sulfuric trioxide, in July, 1993 at the sulfuric acid manufacturing plant operated by General Chemical Company in Richmond, California. General Chemical was the sole provider of sulfuric acid to Chevron's Northern California gasoline refinery. In the aftermath of the explosion, which sent 12 tons of oleum into the atmosphere, 63,000 Californians were exposed and thousands were seen at hospital emergency rooms for chemical exposure. As one of seven firms appointed by the Court to manage this massive toxic chemical class action, our mission was to prove medical causation and the full range of injuries caused by this disaster and to serve as Chair, Science/Medical Causation Committee. As an active member of the Class Action Executive Committee and the Plaintiffs' Management Committee, which was responsible for overseeing and prosecuting this combined class and mass tort action, our responsibilities included formulating, planning and executing the organization of the plaintiffs' proof of scientific and medical evidence including the retention of a mutli-disciplinary team of meteorologists, atmospheric scientists, and computer modeling scientists to conduct a detailed study of the sulfuric acid plume caused by the venting of acid into the atmosphere, participation in the execution of the computerized windfield and plume study to identify and replicate the path and concentrations of the cloud of sulfuric acid as it dispersed, selection and screening of class representatives for the Model Complaint, retention of experts in toxicology, occupational medicine, pulmonology and allergy medicine, participation in focus group presentations, preparing and appearing with our 14 class representatives at their depositions and active involvement in extended settlement discussions leading to the final recovery of $180,000,000. Settlement reported by the San Francisco Chronicle, San Jose Mercury, Associated Press and PR Wire. In re GCC Richmond Works Case, Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding No. 2906, Contra Costa County Superior Court, Martinez, California.

Water Pollution. Spearheaded $15,500,000 recovery for the victims of the pollution of the Sacramento River of July, 1991 when a 19,000 gallon tank car derailed at the Cantara Loop spilling metam sodium and releasing methyl isothiocyanate, a respiratory irritant, affecting 3000 residents of the Dunsmuir and Lake Shasta area. Major responsibilities, as a member of the ten law firm steering committee for this class action, involved proof of medical causation, selection of experts in epidemiology, air dispersion, toxicology, occupational medicine, pulmonary medicine and psychiatry, and trial preparation. Active member of four attorney team that negotiated the final settlement. See San Francisco Chronicle, July 29, 1993. San Francisco Superior Court, Sacramento River Spill Litigation, Judicial Council Coordination Nos. 2617 and 2620.

Sears Repair Fraud. $48,000,000 national recovery in the Sears Automotive Repair Fraud action on behalf of consumers defrauded by Sears commission sales program for auto repairs. Filed in U.S. District Court in San Francisco and successfully concluded August, 1992. Participated as support counsel on the Plaintiffs Steering Committee. In re Sears Automotive Center Consumer Litigation, Action No. C-92-2227, Honorable Robert H. Schnacke.

Breast Implants. We represent 280 women with implants in conjunction with this national class action in Birmingham, Alabama.

GM Pickup Gas Tank. On July 3, 1996 a $5 billion dollar settlement of this national class action was announced. The complete details of the settlement can be found on this web site. The new settlement meets all the objections raised to a previous class action settlement for GM truck owners which was reversed by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and by the Texas Court of Appeals. All lawsuits against GM filed in federal courts across the United States were transferred to the U. S. District Court in Philadelphia under federal Multi-District Litigation rules. Alexander Hawes, LLP represents 278 of 283 plaintiffs before the Honorable William H. Yohn, Jr. Our case was the only one entitled to be heard under federal court jurisdiction rules because it is based on the U. S. Magnusson-Moss Act for breach of warranty, which requires 100 plaintiffs to prosecute a class action. Our contribution to the legal team focused on our practical experience in gas tank failure cases: retention of experts and preparation of direct testimony of liability experts for preliminary motions and trial focusing on defects in the saddlebag tank, proposed alternative placement and designs which would maintain fuel system integrity. In re: General Motors Corporation Pickup Truck Fuel Tank Products Liability Litigation, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, MDL No. 961, Master File No. 92-6450. San Jose Mercury News, August 27, 1993; Wall Street Journal, December 17, 1993. The federal court plaintiffs by agreement with attorneys in state cases filed across the South joined all cases for settlement purposes in the Louisiana state court where preliminary approval of a new settlement was given on July 3,1996. A final approval hearing was granted November 6, 1996. New York Times, July 4, 1996, San Jose Mercury New July 4, 1996, San Francisco Chronicle July 4, 1996, Wall Street Journal July 5, 1996, Associated Press Wire Services July 3, 1996.

Honda Dealers. In May, 1994 we filed a national class action for 1,250 Honda and Acura dealers who refused to pay bribes or kickbacks to Honda sales executives. Twenty-three former senior Honda sales executives have been indicted and twenty-one have pled guilty. Two were found guilty at trial. We are seeking to hold the company responsible for treble damages under the federal RICO racketeering laws on behalf of dealers who did not participate in Honda's program of allowing its sales staff to allocate vehicles to dealers based on bribes, kickbacks and under the table payments. Cases filed across the U.S. are now coordinated for pretrial discovery in the U.S. District Court for Maryland in Baltimore. We served until August, 1996 on the Plaintiffs Executive Committee and at that time became Chair of the Steering Committee. In 1998 a proposed settlement of $330,000,000 was publicly announced.

Radiation Experiment Victims. Actions in Cincinnati, Ohio against General Hospital for experimenting with radiation on terminal cancer patients. We represented the only living survivor of the program.

Defective Siding. Williams v. Weyerhaeuser, San Francisco County Superior Court, California, No. 995787, and Chambers, et al., v. Weyerhaeuser, King County Superior Court, Washington, No. 98-2-21084-2 KNT. The firm serves as one of three class counsel in a class case involving allegations of defective siding manufactured by Weyerhaeuser.

Defective Roofing. Roy v. Cemwood Corporation, Contra Costa County Superior Court, California, No.: MSC99-00499. The firm serves as one of four co-lead counsel in a national class case involving allegations of defective roofing products.

Tobacco. Table Bluff Reservation (Wiyot Tribe), et al., v. Philip Morris, et al., United States District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division, No. C 99-02621 MHP. The firm represents Native American Tribes seeking to challenge the $200 billion plus state tobacco agreement on the grounds that it violates their civil rights.

Insurance Fraud. Lawson, et al., v. Liberty Life, Birmingham, Alabama, No. 96-1119. The Firm, along with four other Plaintiffs' Counsel, represents a proposed class of life insurance policy holders of Liberty Life Corporation who were subjected to unlawful life insurance policy "churning" by Liberty Life.

Cable TV. Hilla v. TCI Cablevision, Santa Clara Superior Court, California, No. CV-769105. The Firm represents California residents involving allegedly illegal overcharges by the cable company for late fees.

Shareholder Fraud. Adaptec Derivative Litigation, Santa Clara Superior Court, California, Master File No. CV 772590. The Firm serves as Liaison Counsel in a derivative action filed on behalf of shareholders of Adaptec, Inc.

Shareholder Fraud. Informix Derivative Securities Litigation, San Mateo Superior Court, California, Case No. 402254. The Firm serves as one of the Plaintiffs' Derivative Counsel in a shareholder lawsuit alleging derivative claims on behalf of Informix.

Shareholder Fraud. Solv-Ex Securities Litigation, Second Judicial District Court, County of Bernalillo, New Mexico, No. CV-96-09869. The Firm serves as Plaintiffs' Class Counsel in a suit alleging securities fraud against Solv-Ex Corporation and other insider defendants.

Shareholder Fraud. Imp, Inc., Securities Litigation, Santa Clara Superior Court, California, No. CV762109. The Firm represents shareholders of Imp, Inc. in an action against certain insiders of Imp, Inc., for alleged insider trading of the Company's stock.

Shareholder Fraud. CBT Group Derivative Litigation, San Mateo Superior Court, California, No. 406767. The firm serves as one of two plaintiffs' counsel representing shareholders of CBT Group, PLC, in a derivative action against officers and directors of the Company.

Shareholder Fraud. Oakley Technology Derivative Litigation, Santa Clara Superior Court, California, No. CV75829. The Firm serves as one of three co-lead counsel in a derivative securities case brought on behalf of shareholders of Oakley Technology, Inc., brought against certain Officers and Directors of the Company.

Shareholder Fraud. Horizon Securities Litigation, United States District Court for New Mexico, No. 96-0442 BB/LCS. The Firm serves as one of the Plaintiffs' Class Counsel in a securities case filed against New Mexico-based Horizon Corporation for alleged violation of federal securities laws.

Shareholder Fraud. Bay Networks Securities Litigation (Garnier v. Bay Networks, CV764357; Greeneway v. Bay Networks, CV765564), Santa Clara County Superior Court, California The Firm serves as one of four-plaintiffs' counsel representing shareholders of Bay Networks for alleged securities violations.

Shareholder Fraud. Unison Healthcare Corporation Litigation, United States District Court of Arizona, Case No. Civ. 97-0583-PHX. The Firm serves as one of the Plaintiffs' Class Counsel representing investors in Unison Healthcare.

Shareholder Fraud. S3 Derivative Litigation, Santa Clara Superior Court, California, No. CV770254. The Firm serves as one of the Plaintiffs' Lead Counsel in a derivative action filed on behalf of shareholders of S-3, Inc.

Antitrust. In re PRK/Lasik, Laser Surgery Overcharges Litigation, Santa Clara Superior Court, California, Master File No. CV772894. The Firm serves as Court-appointed Liaison Counsel in a nationwide class action case alleging antitrust violations against Visx, Inc. and Summit, Inc.

Antitrust. Toys "R" Us Antitrust Litigation, United States District, Northern District of California, No. C-97-3931-TEM. The Firm filed a national class action antitrust complaint on behalf of toy consumers.

Price Fixing. Los Angeles Milk Antitrust Litigation, Los Angeles County Superior Court, California, No. BC 070661. The Firm, along with other Plaintiffs' Counsel, represents consumers arising out of claims of antitrust violations against Los Angeles supermarkets due to alleged price fixing of milk.

Price Fixing. Pharmaceutical Antitrust Cases, San Francisco County Superior Court, California, Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding, No. 2969. The Firm represents independent pharmacies pursuing claims against major drug manufacturers for violation of California's price fixing statutes.

Price Fixing. In re Vitamin Antitrust Litigation, (California, North Carolina, Tennessee and Maine). The firm serves as lead counsel in three states and on the Plaintiffs' Executive Committee in one state in claims involving alleged price fixing by the manufacturers of vitamin products.

Price Fixing. In re Methionine Antitrust Litigation, MDL Docket No. 1311. The firm serves as class counsel in a case involving allegations of price fixing in the Methionine industry.

Antitrust. In re Bromine Antitrust Litigation, Docket No. 1310. The firm serves as class counsel in a case involving allegations of antitrust violations in the Bromine industry.

Empoyment Rights. Allstate Insurance Agent Litigation, Superior Court, California, J.C.C.P. Nos. 2984 & 2985. The Firm represented hundreds of California Allstate Insurance agents who had not been reimbursed for the cost of maintaining Allstate offices between January 1, 1990, and April 30, 1996. In January 1995, the Court certified this case as a class action and final settlement was approved on March 20, 1996

Toxic Tort. Harris et at., v. National Semiconductor, et al., Superior Court of Santa Clara County, California. Class action for all clean room workers at National Semiconductor and its subsidiaries who have developed cancer and for all offspring of clean room workers born with congenital anomalies. The adult cancers include leukemia and cancers of the breast, brain, and uterus. Birth defects in offspring include missing fingers, dental anomalies, and neurologic deficits.

Toxic Tort. Alviso Community Organization v. Maciel, et al., Santa Clara County Superior Court, California, No. 72808. This is the first medical monitoring class action certified in California. The case was settled October 1994. The Firm was appointed Co-Lead Plaintiffs' Counsel on behalf of a Hispanic neighborhood of 2,500 who had been exposed to asbestos-laden dust from adjacent businesses.

Other Complex Litigation

Byer v. Market Transport. After an eight-day trial the jury awarded plaintiffs $8 million. Byer, age 15, suffered irreversible brain damage when the Byer family car was sideswiped by a tractor and trailer.

Nevarez v. Foremost Dairies. A multi-vehicle auto-truck collision that resulted in identical C-5/C-6 quadriplegic injuries to a father and daughter when their car was rear-ended on smoke-covered I-5 by the defendant's tractor and trailer. Total settlement of $11 million.

Aceves v. Regal Pale Brewing. The California Supreme Court unanimously recognized the special risks presented to construction workers, confirmed the duty of their employer to take special precautions to prevent on-the-job injuries and reaffirmed a jury verdict for the plaintiff.

Helm's Creek Hydroelectric Facility. Represented five families in wrongful death actions against PG&E arising from a defectively designed scaffolding system in a 500' vertical shaft which failed. Structured settlements providing in excess of $25 million to the surviving families.

Throop V. Conrail. An $8.5 million award for triple amputation electrical burn injuries suffered by a teenager trespassing on railroad property. First lawyer in the United States to uncover and prove the railroad's electrical system had caused, on average, 24 deaths/major injuries per year.

Sinacore v. Superior Court, 81 CA3d 223, a case of first impression in California, recognizing the confidentiality of a social worker's records of children.

Sollfrank v. Mid-Cal Farms. A $2.3 million recovery for the wrongful death of a husband and father caused by drunk driving.

Doe v. Jeske. A $1.1 million verdict for a twelve-year-old victim of child molestation.

Cunningham v. Shortstop. Recovery of $1.5 million in cash, plus an annual annuity of $40,000, for a brain-damaged teenager injured by a teenage driver who was intoxicated by beer sold by defendant.

Valente v. Union Oil. A construction laborer employed by Timec to perform routine repairs to union Oil's Santa Maria refinery was burned by steam escaping from a defective pipe fitting.

McGreevy v. Abbott. First civil child molestation case tried in Santa Clara County.

Smethurst v. G&W Specialty Company. Settled the morning of trial after extensive pre-trial discovery against manufacturers of a 12,000 volt oil-filled switch which exploded when Smethurst turned the switch to the wrong position and, contrary to good practice, attempted to return the switch to its original position.

Furchtenicht v. Peabody Barnes and General Electric. Chief counsel for plaintiffs in a product liability case for wrongful death.

California Casualty v. Weber. Chief counsel for the victims of child molestation in a case of first impression in Santa Clara County. The court held that Weber suffered from a mental disease, could not control his conduct in accordance with reason and the insurance carrier, under these limited circumstances, was obligated to satisfy the victims' claims for damages, even though a result of criminal conduct.

Bucol v. City of Oakland. Arose from the shooting death of an 18-year-old in the Oakland Auditorium at a Kool and The Gang Concert, by unknown assailants. Thorough investigation and discovery showed that the City and rock promoter failed to establish reasonable security precautions, despite knowing the reputation of the character of the crowd usually attracted by this type of concert and not stopping the concert when multiple fights and thefts were reported.

Pacific West Cable Company v. City of Sacramento. Chief trial counsel in the first jury trial in the United States contesting the power of cities to grant an exclusive monopoly to a cable television firm.

Century Federal v. Cities of Palo Alto, Atherton and Menlo Park. A federal civil rights action for denying free press rights by granting a monopoly to one cable television company. San Francisco Federal Judge Eugene Lynch ordered the defendant cities to allow construction of Century's cable system.

Whiteley and Cox v. The State of California. $1,750,000 recovery in a personal injury action against the California Highway Patrol arising from a late-night pursuit of an escapee from the California Youth Authority.

Collins v. Van Waters & Rogers. A products liability action, involved the first medically reported case of lip cancer secondary to repeated exposure to liquid chromate solvents used as cleaning agents in the manufacture of electronic components. A case of first impression.

Some of our past class action litigation includes:

Other Complex Litigation