$4.2 Million settlement of a class action against American Traffic Systems, Inc. and 18 New Jersey municipalities alleging a failure to comply with New Jersey laws governing red light cameras. (Bryan H. Mintz, with co-counsel, District of New Jersey, 2013).
Results
Our New Jersey lawyers have tried to verdict or settled hundreds of cases. Each and every case is important to Mintz & Geftic. The following are some of the verdicts or settlements obtained by our attorneys.
$6 Million settlement of a class action against Discover Financial Services related to its merchant membership program and the allegation that the bank was charging merchants for the program without authorization (Bryan H. Mintz, with co-counsel, Southern District of Florida), 2011).
$10 Million settlement of a class action against Discover Financial Services relating to the bank’s credit cards. alleging that the bank imposed payment protection without consent , deceptively marketed the service, and improperly administered the plan harming consumers (Bryan H. Mintz, with co-counsel, Northern District of Illinois, 2013).
$20 Million settlement of a class action against Bank of America relating to the bank’s credit cards. alleging that the bank imposed payment protection without consent , deceptively marketed the service, and improperly administered the plan harming consumers (Bryan H. Mintz, with co-counsel, Northern District of California, 2013).
$21 million verdict, Child Services Negligence-inflicted damages upon a child in foster care. Infant child was improperly placed in foster care and was abused suffering “shaken baby syndrome” resulting in brain damage and multiple bone fractures. State was held liable for breaching its own procedures and regulations in child placement and required oversight. Foster parents were held jointly liable for the inflicted physical damage. (Jeffrey E. Strauss, co-counsel, Burlington County N.J.)(2006).
$23.5 Million settlement of a class action against HSBC Card Services relating to the bank’s credit cards. alleging that the bank imposed payment protection without consent , deceptively marketed the service, and improperly administered the plan harming consumers (Bryan H. Mintz, with co-counsel, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 2013).