Method Home Products Class Action Settlement July 2, 2021 Class Action Settlement – Connary, et al. v. S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc., California Superior Court, Alameda County Case No. RG20062675 FDPK is pleased to announce preliminary approval of the proposed settlement for Method Products (Connary, et al. v. S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc.,), a class action alleging false and misleading “non-toxic” claims on certain Method Products sold across the United States. The Settlement establishes a $2.25 million fund, which will be used to make cash payments to Class Members who submit a timely and valid claim online, as well as class notice and administration costs, attorneys’ costs, fees and expenses, any Service Awards the Court awards to the named Plaintiffs. Additionally, SC Johnson has agreed to remove the “non-toxic” labeling after the Settlement is approved. Details of the Settlement and class members’ options, including to participate in the settlement, are available at www.HouseholdProductsSettlement.com. The Settlement Class includes all persons who reside in the U.S. and purchased in the U.S. any of the below listed Method Brand products between May 14, 2016 and May 13, 2021 for use and not for resale: Method All-Purpose Cleaner Method Squirt + Mop Hard Floor Cleaner Method All-Purpose Cleaner for Dog Method Bathroom Cleaner Method All-Purpose Cleaner for Cat Method Wood for Good Daily Clean Method All-Purpose Cleaning Wipes Method Dish Soap, Method Smarty Dish Method All-Purpose Cleaning Wipes for Dog Method Smarty Dish Plus Method All-Purpose Cleaning Wipes for Cat Method PowerDish Method Squirt + Mop Wood Floor Cleaner Method Daily Granite Cleaner Method Foaming Bathroom Cleaner Method Stainless Steel Polish Method Glass + Surface Cleaner Method Heavy Duty Degreaser Method Wood for Good Polish Method Daily Shower Cleaner Class members can submit claims online or by mailing the claim form by November 1, 2021. Class Members who submit a timely claim can receive a cash payment, depending on any proof of purchase, as follows: a) With Proof of Purchase. Claimants who file a valid Claim Form for purchases of Products with Proof of Purchase may obtain reimbursement of up to One Dollar ($1.00) per Product purchased during the Class Period, without any limitation on the number of Products purchased. The Initial Claim Amount depends on the number of Products purchased per the Proof of Purchase provided and is subject to a pro rata upward or downward adjustment pursuant to Section 4.4 of the Settlement. b) Without Proof of Purchase. Claimants who file a Claim Form for purchases of Products without Proof of Purchase may obtain reimbursement of up to One Dollar ($1.00) per Product purchased for up to ten (10) Products purchased during the Class Period. Claimants seeking reimbursement without Proof of Purchase must state under penalty of perjury the type(s) and number of Products purchased and the approximate date(s) of purchases. The Initial Claim Amount is subject to a pro rata upward or downward adjustment pursuant to Section 4.4 of the Settlement. The Court scheduled a Fairness Hearing for November 16, 2021, at 3:00 PM, Pacific Time at Dept. 23 of the Administration Building, 1221 Oak Street, 4th Floor, Oakland, CA 94612. More information about the Settlement may be found at: http://www.householdproductssettlement.com/ Click on the links to review important documents: Order Granting Preliminary Approval Method Notice of Settlement Method Settlement Agreement Method First Amended Complaint Method Claimant Form
Update: Talisman Energy Class Action Settlement May 19, 2021 FDPK Class Action Lawyers Secure Total Value of $36 Million in Settlement for Underpaid Oil and Gas Royalty Holders On May 12, 2021, Judge Keith P. Ellison in the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas granted final approval with no objectors to the Talisman Energy Class Action Settlement (Regmund, et al. v. Talisman Energy, USA, Inc.), a class action alleging failure to pay contractually owed oil and gas royalties. Feinstein Doyle Payne & Kravec, LLC Partners Joe Kravec and Wyatt Lison served as Co-Class Counsel along with Bryan Blevins and W. Michael Hamilton of the Texas-based law firm Provost Umphrey. Image: Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, https://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/eagleford The Settlement Agreement provides a total value of over $36 million to Texas oil and gas royalty holders. The gravamen of the case was that Talisman breached leases with these royalty holders by using a volumetric allocation rather than a compositional allocation that accounts for actual well production and estimating shrinkage factors. This occurred in the Eagle Ford Area from January 1, 2013 to June 1, 2016. Judge Ellison praised Joe, Wyatt, and their co-counsel in the Order and Judgment Granting Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees, Litigation Expenses, and Case Contribution Awards, noting “Class Counsel brought their significant experience to bear in undertaking a complex oil and gas case on a fully contingent basis, expended substantial resources with no guarantee of success, devoted 5,097.8 hours of professional time to the matter for nearly six years, and achieved a result which provides participating class members with a cash fund from which 100% of their alleged royalty underpayments will be recovered, and the freedom from future claims for recoupment or defensive offsets by Talisman.” “The settlement provides participating class members with full relief after the payment of fees and costs,” Partner Joe Kravec said. “This is a tremendous settlement for participating class members. I’m pleased that we could achieve this result.” If you have a similar issue, such as not getting the proper oil and gas payments for royalties you believe you are owed under your contract with an oil and gas company, contact Feinstein Doyle Payne & Kravec, LLC today. Learn more about the settlement at www.EagleFordRoyaltySettlement.com. Click on the links to review important documents: Order and Judgment Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement Talisman Notice of Settlement Talisman Final Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement Talisman Heirship Beneficiary Info Form Talisman First Amended Complaint
Civil Rights Settlement December 17, 2012 PA Funeral Director Law Changes Following Civil Rights Settlement (Wasserman v. Burrell, et al.) PA Funeral Director Law changes were made due to the civil rights settlement by Pittsburgh Rabbi Wasserman in his “Funeral Director” interpretation case against the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. This important civil rights settlement secures religious freedom for rabbis and other religious leaders. In August 2012, the Rabbi’s legal team filed suit against the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The Complaint alleged that the Rabbi’s rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the Constitution of the United States, as well as Article 1 of the Pennsylvania Constitution, had been violated. The Memorandum of Understanding of this civil rights settlement excludes all individuals who perform religious rites, sects, and any committee of a church, mosque, synagogue or temple from the definition of “funeral director” under Pennsylvania law. Rabbi Wasserman and leaders of all other religious faiths can now conduct funeral services in Pennsylvania. The State Board of Funeral Directors must begin new enforcement procedures to ensure that the civil rights of individuals who perform religious burials are not violated. Documents related to this civil rights case may be reviewed here: 2012-12-17 Wasserman press release. Memorandum of Understanding. Stipulation.
