Class action lawsuits are serious, high stakes litigation, and involve complex legal issues that require lawyers experienced in class action representation. Mintz & Geftic’s Bryan H. Mintz, has handled class action lawsuits against major corporations throughout the country. Mr. Mintz has been certified as lead class counsel in numerous major class actions and his experience in class actions range from lawsuits concerning deceptive marketing and consumer class actions to class actions involving wage and hour violations. We at Mintz & Geftic are committed to protecting the interests of groups of individuals who have been similarly wronged by large corporations. We work directly with the…
class action
$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).
$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).
$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).
Just last month, New Jersey’s Appellate Division, in Daniels v. Hollister Co., held that “ascertainability” should not be considered as a factor by New Jersey trial courts when deciding whether to certify a class action.