Class Actions Blog

Posts Tagged ‘Citibank’

California Supreme Court says arbitration clauses that bar injunctive relief are unenforceable

Posted on: April 6th, 2017 by Steve Larson

On April 6, 2017, the California Supreme Court unanimously held that an arbitration agreement that waives the right to public injunctive relief is contrary to California public policy and therefore is unenforceable under California law. The decision reverses an appellate court’s interpretation that the U.S. Supreme Court’s Concepcion decision preempts state-law arbitration rules.

Read more…


Citigroup settles CDO class action

Posted on: September 9th, 2013 by Steve Larson

Stocks and sharesA New York federal judge on Tuesday approved a settlement that will have Citigroup, Inc. pay $730 million to an investor class that alleged the bank misled purchasers about its exposure to collateralized debt obligations (“CDO’s”) backed by subprime assets.  The settlement is one of the 15 largest recoveries in a securities class action. It is the second-largest recovery in a securities class action brought on behalf of purchasers of debt securities and one of the three largest recoveries ever in a case that does not involve a financial restatement.

After sending notice of the settlement to 500,000 potential class members, the court received exactly zero objections regarding the fairness of the $730 million figure or the plan of allocation, U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein wrote on Tuesday. Read more…


Second Circuit rulings might eliminate FLSA class actions

Posted on: September 6th, 2013 by Steve Larson

Blog Wage and HourThe Second Circuit ruled Monday that Citigroup Inc.’s individual arbitration policy must be enforced in an overtime collective action, reinforcing its acceptance of class waivers in Fair Labor Standards Act cases.

In a summary order, a three-judge panel reversed a district court’s decision that the company’s policy requiring individual arbitration of employment disputes could not be enforced in a collective action accusing the banking giant of misclassifying its home-lending specialists as exempt from the FLSA’s overtime pay requirements.  Read more…


Citigroup agrees to pay $730 million to settle securities fraud class action

Posted on: April 11th, 2013 by Steve Larson

Stocks and sharesCitigroup, the third largest U.S. bank by assets, agreed to pay $730 million to settle claims it misled debt investors about its condition during the financial crisis.  The deal would resolve a lawsuit by investors who bought Citigroup bonds and preferred stock from May 2006 through November 2008.  The settlement requires requires court approval and according to the bank, is covered by existing litigation reserves. Read more…


Citigroup settles securities fraud lawsuit arising out of CDO’s

Posted on: September 11th, 2012 by Steve Larson

Citigroup Inc. agreed to pay $590 million to settle a shareholder lawsuit accusing it of hiding tens of billions of dollars of toxic mortgage assets, one of the largest settlements stemming from the global financial crisis.

The agreement resolves claims that shareholders ended up with massive losses after the bank failed to take timely writedowns on collateralized debt obligations, many backed by subprime mortgages, and engaged in self-dealing transactions that hid the risks. Read more…


Overdraft fee class action filed against Citibank

Posted on: January 3rd, 2012 by Steve Larson

An account holder in California has filed suit against Citibank alleging that Citibank’s unfair and unconscionable assessment and collection of overdraft fees is in violation of its contractual terms with the customers in which the contract affirmatively states: “That there is no Citibank fee charged for POS transactions.”  The case is entitled Ronald S. Arendas v. Citibank Inc., Case No. 4:11-cv-06462 (N.D. Calif., December 19, 2011).

This case is not like the debit transaction reordering cases that I have referred to several times on this blog, i.e. those that have been transferred to an MDL proceeding in Florida.  Instead, the Plaintiff alleges that Citibank imposed on customers overdraft fees in certain prescribed circumstances known only to Citibank, charging its customers an overdraft fee of as much as $34 per transaction — even when this transaction was for only a few dollars.  He accuses Citibank of intentionally designing this automatic, fee-based overdraft scheme to maximize overdraft fee revenue.  He adds that Citibank misled customers to believe that, if a debit card transaction was approved, no overdraft fees would be due, and that Citibank never obtained the agreement of its customers to the imposition of overdraft fees in the context of debit card transactions.


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