Consumer Advocate Legal Update : Class Action Lawyers & Attorneys : Khorrami Pollard & Abir Law Firm : Mass Torts, Products Liability

The latest edition of the AAJ Minority Caucus Newsletter had a special article from KPA 's own Neda Sargordan.  Her article "AAJ and the Minority Caucus - Paths to a Fulfilling Legal Career" discusses the all too familiar "I'm too busy to get involved" argument brought about by most attorneys, and sets the record straight that no, you are never too busy to further your legal career.  Read her article and find out what benefits she has gained since joining the AAJ Minority Caucus and how getting involved isn't the hassle you may think it is.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

On March 24, Employment Law360 reported on Judge Paul G. Gardephe of the the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York and his decision to deny a request for dismissal from Rite Aid in the Naula et al v. Rite Aid of New York Inc. et al case. Rite Aid claimed the suit was duplicative to another suit, thus requesting for dismissal. KPA associate Matt Bailey is one of the lead attorneys representing the plaintiff and is quoted in the article.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

If you are a client of the Katrina Canal Breaches Consolidated Litigation pertaining to Barge ING 4727, don't forget all case updates and court documents can be found on www.BargeCase.com.

We are always here to help, if you have any questions please call our office today - 866.546.7266.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The Los Angeles Times reported yesterday on the latest links between bisphosphonates (such as Fosamax) and atypical bone fractures.

This is yet another example of dangerous risks appearing long after the FDA approved a prescription.  Do you think pharmaceutical companies need to be more accountable when studies come to these types of conclusions?

Tell us what you think.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Maryam Danishwar may be one of the youngest attorneys at KPA, but that hasn’t stopped her from being one of the most active attorneys within the plaintiffs’ bar. You are guaranteed to see a whole lot more from her in the future, so get to know her now…

Q: Where were you born? A: Afghanistan

Q: What is your favorite quote?  A: A bank is a place where they lend you an umbrella in fair weather and ask for it back when it begins to rain. Robert Frost knew all about student loans.

Q: What is your favorite candy bar?  A: Almond Joy, it’s the blend of my three favorite ingredients.

Q: If you could have any super hero power, what would it be?   A: To freeze time.

Q: Favorite sports team?  A: The Los Angeles Lakers, I am a diehard purple and gold blooded fan.

Q: Favorite athlete?  A: Nick Van Exel (aka Nick the Quick) ever since his days in Cincinnati.

Q: What CD is playing in your car right now?  A: Rotation of Alicia Keys – The Element of Freedom and Shakira – She Wolf

Q: What is your favorite movie?  A: My Cousin Vinny

Q: Favorite law show on TV?  A:  The Practice

Q: Tell me about your involvement with CAALA, CAOC, AAJ and the LA County Bar Association. A: CAALA:  I’m in the New Lawyers Committee;  CAOC:  I’m a part of the Women’s Caucus;  AAJ: I’m a part of the NLD;  LA County Bar:  I volunteer at the Domestic Violence Project (DVP).

Q: Why do you think it is so important for attorneys to get involved within their industry?  A: To shape the industry to not only fit their needs but to also allow them to pursue their goals.

Q: Most valuable lesson you have learned since becoming an attorney?  A: Question everything.

Q: Do you work best in the morning or at night?  A: Morning by far.

Q: Best part about being a plaintiff attorney?  A: The human aspect of it.  There’s a lot of client contact involved in this field which allows you to see and understand who you’re helping.  There’s a great deal of satisfaction that comes from plaintiffs work.

Q: If you weren’t an attorney, what would be your next career choice?  A: Sports Analyst for Fox Sports West

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

The latest edition of the KPA Monthly Update was released yesterday to subscribers.

This month's issue includes these articles from the KPA staff:

Katie McSweeney - "The California Supreme Court's Holding in Schacter v. Citigroup: A Minor Victory for Employers and a Cautionary Tale for Employees"

Neda Sargordan - "Medical Device Safety Act - A Fight Against Corporate Immunity"

Adam Kerns, J.D., C.P.A. - "Client Trust Accounting: A Snapshot of What Lawyers Need to Know"

Didn't get this month's edition?  Join our mailing list now - it's free!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

According to one expert, the answer might just be yes. That expert is University of Kentucky law professor specializing in product liability, Mary Davis who has been quoted as saying that the litigation mounting against Toyota in the wake of its recent recall of 8.5 million vehicles worldwide, “is bigger than anything I’ve ever seen.”  In light of Davis’ work as a trial attorney in the far-reaching multistate asbestos litigation and her expertise regarding the Ford Explorer recall a decade ago, this statement packs a punch.

On February 9, 2010 the first suit was filed in Covington, Kentucky on behalf of Toyota owners in Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, and Florida alleging that the company knowingly concealed defective, dangerous accelerator systems on its vehicles in order to protect its sales. The suit further alleges racketeering, mail fraud, and wire fraud, arising from Toyota’s representations that their vehicles were safe, when,  by all appearances, it knew they were not. The Kentucky suit names defendants ranging from Toyota’s giant assembly plant in Georgetown, Kentucky (the automaker’s largest in North America) which was responsible for building the engines and “powertrain” components that are allegedly subject to acceleration problems, to Toyota Motor Credit Corp., and every facet of the corporation in between.

In the less than a month that has elapsed since the filing of the initial Kentucky case, at least 40 more cases have been filed by 22 law firm across 16 different states. On March 25, 2010 there will be a hearing in the U.S. District Court in San Diego regarding consolidation of the cases. An attorney for the Covington Plaintiffs believes that Kentucky has a good chance of hosting the multi-district litigation in light due to Toyota’s largest North American plant being located in Georgetown, Kentucky.

Where the litigation will be consolidated, and exactly how massive it will become remain to be seen, but one thing is clear, the cases that have been filed to date are just the beginning.

Are you the owner of a recalled Toyota or Lexis vehicle? Find out here: http://www.toyota.com/recall/

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Bank overdraft fee cases across the country are moving forward after U.S District Judge James Lawrence King dismissed requests from banks to stop overdraft lawsuits.  As reported in Saturday's Miami Herald, customers are taking action against many of the country's most popular banks for manipulating the way charges are posted to bank accounts, triggering overdraft fees to apply to accounts when they shouldn't.

If you have been a victim of deceptive banking practices, check out this blog for more information.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

If you think one of the benefits of a plaintiff’s practice is that you don’t have to keep timely and accurate time records, you are badly mistaken if you prosecute class actions. Class action settlements must be presented to a court for approval. Pursuant to recent Court of Appeal decisions in Kullar v Foot Locker Retail, Inc. 168 Cal. App. 4th 116 (2008) and Clark v American Residential Services LLC 175 Cal. App. 4^th 785 (2009), courts are increasingly scrutinizing settlements, including accompanying applications for attorneys’ fees and costs. (Despite any agreement by the parties to the contrary, the court has an “independent duty to evaluate the requested amount [in a class settlement agreement] and award only what is reasonable.” Garabedian v. Los Angeles Cellular Telephone Company 118 Cal.App.4th 123, 128. (2004))  If your fee application seeks a percentage of a common fund created for the settlement, courts will often require that the percentage requested be cross-checked with class counsel’s lodestar (hours billed x reasonable hourly rate). If the lodestar is less than the percentage fee requested, the court will determine what, if any, multiplier to award to arrive at an approved fee. See, PLCM Group, Inc. v. Drexler , 22 Cal.4th 1084, 1095-96 (2000); Ramos v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.  82 Cal. App. 4th 615, 625-26 (2000); Ketchum III v. Moses 24 Cal.4th 1122, 1132-36 (2000).

In order to present the court with an accurate lodestar, class counsel must track hours billed by timekeeper (i.e. attorney, paralegal, law clerk). And, courts are increasingly reluctant to take counsel’s word for hours billed via a summary declaration. For example, in a case recently handled by our office, the court issued a tentative ruling approving the settlement as fair and reasonable but deferred its decision on our fee application pending the submission of detailed billing records reflecting hours billed and billing descriptions for each entry. The court wanted to confirm that there was little or no duplication of efforts in the time records. The court also insisted that a detailed cost bill be submitted including copies of invoices reflecting payment.  Because we were diligent in tracking our time and costs, we were able to provide the requested documentation to the court at the final approval hearing held two days later, resulting in prompt approval of the full fee request.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

KPA founding partner, Shawn Khorrami, was published this month in one of the top legal publications in Southern California, Advocate Magazine.

His article, titled "Representing Plaintiffs in Mass-Tort Cases," leads practitioners through simple tips and steps to remember when handling cases with a large client load. 

Pass along to a colleague after reading, Shawn's advice is great for attorneys at all levels!

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Interesting piece in the New York Times Research section on parental views of vaccines and the possible link to autism.  This has been an ongoing debate, and scare, which has lead 1 in 8 parents to refuse a recommended vaccination for their young child. 

Read the entire article.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

Here are some great legal blogs I have come across this year.  Take a minute and check them out:

ProtectConsumerJustice.org:

Latest information and developments in consumer law, with a focus on the civil justice system, environmental protection, medical negligence, political influence, tobacco, tort reform and vehicle defects.

Bailey’s Class Action Daily:

A great source of news and discussion on class action issues, both in California and nationwide.

Drug Injury Lawyer Blog:

Catch the latest news and progress in pharmaceutical and medical device litigation from the experienced attorneys at Pogust Braslow and Millrood.

The Super Lawyers Blog:

For the latest updates on the top practicing firms and attorneys across the country.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

This article, "Concerns Over 'Metal on Metal' Hip Implants," from Wednesdays New York Times, highlights the ongoing discussion and alleged danger of using certain hip replacement devices. 

Doctors aren't happy with the performance of many 'metal on metal' devices, and advise caution to other doctors and patents considering these systems.  Some devices have been recalled, and many are being replaced due to continued complications.  Learn more about metal hip implant devices, like the Zimmer Durom Cup.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (1)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In a recent decision, California state court Judge Brett Klein ordered attorneys fees be paid to plaintiffs’ counsel in the form of gift cards for defendant’s retail store. What makes this order more unusual than the form of payment? Plaintiffs’ attorney is a male, and defendant is a women’s apparel retailer. 

The class action asserted that Windsor Fashions was committing routine violations of the Song-Beverly Credit Card Act, and sought compensation for “all customers who, between November 29, 2006 and November 18, 2008, purchased merchandise from Defendant’s stores in the State of California, used a credit card to make the purchase(s), and whose address, E mail address or telephone number was requested and recorded by a Winsor Fashions employee.”

At the time of Judge Klein’s decision, preliminary approval of settlement had already been granted by Judge Susan Bryant-Deason, who was presiding over the case at the time. The preliminary approval order called for payment to the class in the form of $10 gift vouchers and $125,000 to class counsel in reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs. 

On the day of the final approval hearing, Judge Bryant-Deason was ill, and Judge Klein took the bench in her absence. Judge Klein not only went against Judge Bryant-Deason’s preliminary approval order and changed the terms of the settlement after the final approval hearing, but according to state Commission on Judicial Performance, he “engaged in a pattern of sarcasm and improper remarks toward the attorneys.”

Judges generally have discretion to determine what is and what is not considered fair and reasonable for attorneys’ fees. However, judges do not have unfettered ability to rule outside the scope of acceptable practice. The state Commission on Judicial Performance ultimately barred Judge Klein from presiding over future court cases and from receiving any state court-referred work.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

On March 2, 2010, the Ninth Circuit reversed, in part, a district court’s grant of summary judgment in Rutti v. Lojack Corp., 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 4278 (9th Cir. 2010). The case – a proposed class action/FLSA collective action brought on behalf of Lojack alarm installation technicians – challenged Lojack’s failure to pay for time spent commuting to client locations. The district court granted Lojack’s summary judgment, holding that the plaintiff’s commute was not compensable as a matter of law under both California law, as well as under the Portal to Portal Act (a component of the FLSA).

To read the rest of this post, and get the latest information on class action issues in California and nationwide, subscribe to www.baileydaily.com

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

In a press release issued last Friday, KPA announced their sponsorship and leadership commitments for the first half of 2010. 

Not only devoting money to sponsor events such as the Capitol Hill Reception at the upcoming AAJ Minority Caucus Lobby Days and the Keynote Lunch featuring Roger Dreyer at the CAOC Tahoe Seminar, KPA also vows to dedicate thought leadership through judging the AAJ Student Trial Advocacy Competition, presenting at the CAOC Tahoe Seminar, and contributing articles to the AAJ Women's Caucus and Minority Caucus Newsletters.

Look for the KPA attorneys at each of these amazing events.  They continue to dedicate themselves to developing programs that create discussion between plaintiff attorneys across the country, will you?

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link