Class Actions Blog

LJM Preservation and Growth Fund sued in class action

Posted on: February 15th, 2018 by Steve Larson

LJM Preservation and Growth Fund lost 80 percent of its value betting the wrong way on market turmoil in the first week of February. Now, it has been named in a proposed securities class action alleging the company and its executives lied to investors about its strategy. The suit seeks to represent a class of investors who held shares in the LJM Preservation and Growth Fund between February 28, 2015, and February 7, 2018.

Read more…

Chiquita settles terrorist funding class action

Posted on: February 13th, 2018 by Steve Larson

On February 5, 2018, Chiquita Brand International (“Chiquita”) announced that it had reached a confidential settlement agreement with plaintiffs in three cases consolidated into an MDL proceeding. The complaints alleged that Chiquita supported Colombian terror group Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia in the 1990s. The terror group was responsible for the kidnapping and murder of Americans, whose families are the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

Read more…

Class action filed against Jimmy John’s over non-competes

Posted on: January 30th, 2018 by Steve Larson

Jimmy John’s is a sandwich food chain. It requires franchisees to sign non-solicitation and no-hire agreements that prohibit franchisees from recruiting employees from other Jimmy John’s franchises. The agreements provide that if the provisions are violated, Jimmy John’s may impose a $50,000 penalty, or terminate a franchisee’s franchise agreement entirely.

A former employee in Illinois, where Jimmy John’s is based, has filed a putative class action in Illinois federal court alleging the practice of requiring the execution of non-solicitation and no-hire agreements between franchisees is a violation of federal and state antitrust laws. The complaint alleges that the $50,000 fine for violating the no-hire and non-solicitation agreements is more than 140 percent of the 2017 Jimmy John’s initial franchise fee, and if a franchise were terminated, the agreements provide that Jimmy John’s could impose up to three years’ worth of restaurant royalties as “liquidated damages.”

Jimmy John’s was previously sued by the attorneys general of Illinois and New York in separate cases that sought to end its practice of forcing employees to sign non-compete agreements prohibiting them from working at another sandwich shop within 12 months of the end of their employment with Jimmy John’s. Those actions did not address the non-solicitation and no-hire agreements.

The complaint alleges: “As part of its system to maintain its significant competitive advantage, Jimmy John’s franchisees, at the direction of and with the assistance of Jimmy John’s itself, have together colluded to suppress the wages and employment opportunities of the restaurant-based employees who work at Jimmy John’s franchise locations throughout the United States.”

The case is Butler v. Jimmy John’s Franchise, LLC et al., case number 3:18-cv-00133 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.

Cyber-currency exchange site named in class action

Posted on: January 25th, 2018 by Steve Larson

On January 10, 2018, a complaint was filed on behalf of a putative class of subscribers to a defunct digital currency exchange called Vircurex in federal court in Colorado. Vircurex subscriber, Timothy Shaw, alleges that the Beijing-based company unlawfully froze subscribers’ accounts when it disabled the ability to withdraw Bitcoin, Litecoin, Terracoin and Feathercoin in 2014.

Read more…

ComScore settles investor class action for $110 million

Posted on: January 22nd, 2018 by Steve Larson

Investors in a class action against media analytics company comScore Inc. asked a New York federal judge on January 12th to approve a $110 million settlement. The class action alleged intentional miscalculations the company’s accounting department made that caused artificial stock value inflation and led to heavy losses. Under the settlement if approved, comScore will pay the class $27 million in cash, as well as stocks valued at $82.7 million. There are potentially thousands of shareholders who saw their share prices fall more than 33 percent after the company announced it needed to recalculate three years of incorrect financial statements.

Read more…

Law firm Ogletree Deakins is named in a $300 million gender discrimination class action

Posted on: January 19th, 2018 by Steve Larson

A shareholder in Ogletree Deakins’ Orange County office has filed suit against the law firm alleging the firm’s male-dominated leadership disproportionately favors men over women in pay, promotions and business development opportunity. The complaint alleges that women hold only two of nine seats on Ogletree’s board of directors and two of six firm officer positions. The complaint also alleges that compensation decisions are controlled by a male-dominated compensation committee and then voted upon by Ogletree’s equity shareholders, which are about 80 percent male.

Read more…

Legal Disclaimer

The information contained in this blog does not constitute legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. We make no claims, promises or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained in or linked to this blog.

About Class Actions:

About this blog

This blog is intended to provide information to the general public and to practitioners about developments that may impact Oregon class actions.

About the author

  • Steve Larson

  • Steve Larson
  • Steve Larson has been representing investors, consumers and employees in class actions in Oregon for over 20 years. He is a shareholder at the law firm of Stoll Berne in Portland, Oregon.
Follow stollberne on Twitter

Subscribe to this blog