Law.com
  • News
    • Newswire
    • Supreme Court
    • International
    • Legal Blog Watch
    • The Hot Seat
    • Video
  • Publications
    • The American Lawyer
    • Corporate Counsel
    • Law Technology News
    • The National Law Journal
    • New York Law Journal
    • New Jersey Law Journal
    • Connecticut Law Tribune
    • The Legal Intelligencer (PA)
    • Daily Business Review (FL)
    • Delaware Law Weekly
    • Daily Report (GA)
    • The Recorder (CA)
    • Texas Lawyer
    • Publication E-Alerts
    • More Publication Sites
  • Legal Research & Directories
    • Books Online
    • Smart Litigator
    • ALM Experts
    • Verdict Search
    • Court Reporters
    • Legal Dictionary
    • LegalTech® Directory
    • Newsletters
    • More Directories
  • Surveys, Lists & Rankings
    • Amlaw 100
    • NLJ 250
    • Global 100
    • The A-List
    • ALM Legal Intelligence
    • Surveys
    • More Lists & Rankings
  • Special Reports
  • lawjobs.com
  • LawCatalog Store
  • CLE & Events
    • CLE Center
    • ALM Events
    • LegalTech
    • Virtual LegalTech
    • Insight Legal Events
    • Webinars
Home
 
Article
Twitter LinkedIn RSS
Sign Up for Newsletters

Law.com Home > Amex Wins Rare National Class Action Trial Over Allegations of Overcharging

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Amex Wins Rare National Class Action Trial Over Allegations of Overcharging

By Pamela A. MacLean All Articles 

The National Law Journal

March 31, 2009

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

Related Items

  • Second Circuit Rejects Class Action Waiver in American Express Merchant Pact
  • 2nd Circuit: Plaintiffs in Credit Card Antitrust Case Cannot Be Compelled to Arbitrate

In a rare case of a national class action going to trial, American Express Co. has defeated a consumer class action in California alleging that it overcharged customers as much as $310 million for travel insurance. The win was all the more unusual because it came at the end of the plaintiffs' 11-week trial presentation of evidence and without American Express putting on its case. Hoffman v. American Express Travel Related Services Co. Inc., No. 01-022881 (Alameda Co., Calif., Sup. Ct.).

Judge George Hernandez of the California Superior Court in Fremont, Calif., ruled on March 26, after hearing 11 weeks of testimony from the class of cardholders in a nonjury trial, that the cardholders failed to prove their case.

The suit alleged that American Express overbilled on travel insurance for cardholders who charged flights on their charge cards and that it allegedly used deceptive marketing of the program that misrepresented or was unclear about how the system worked.

Max Folkenflik of Folkenflik & McGerity in New York, an attorney for the plaintiffs, pledged to appeal the trial court ruling.

"We do indeed intend to pursue this," he said. "We are surprised and astonished there could be a rule of law that allows a company to take money that does not belong to it and allows it to keep the money if individuals do not catch it," he said.

In addition, he said a separate class action against American Express remains in the Eastern District of New York, representing 25 percent of the total class of customers. That case was stayed awaiting this trial outcome and it includes a civil racketeering claim not litigated in California.

"We think American Express' position was absolutely correct throughout the litigation and are gratified the judge analyzed the case to come out the way he did," said David Shapiro of the Oakland, Calif., office of Boies, Schiller & Flexner, who represented American Express.

"There are very few nationwide class action cases that go to trial and all the way to resolution. Amex has disputed the plaintiffs' contentions from the beginning," said Shapiro.

The California trial that ended on March 26 was the second phase of the long-running dispute. This phase centered on the deception marketing allegations. Hernandez had previously ruled in the first phase of the trial, which began in November, that the terms of the contract with customers were unambiguous under California law.

The lawsuit began in 2001. The California and New York suits cover roughly 7.5 million current and former American Express cardholders who purchased the travel-related insurance between 1995 and 2008.

The company charged a fee for airline travel purchased on its charge card and would sweep in inappropriate insurance charges for flights consumers later canceled, seat upgrades and baggage fees.

Consumers were given the opportunity to seek refunds through a form provided by the company or by calling for a refund, according to Shapiro. It was estimated that the company refunded about $140 million in the course of 13 years, he said.

Also representing the plaintiffs was Michael Brickman of Richardson, Patrick, Westbrook & Brickman in Charleston, S.C.



Subscribe to The National Law Journal

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Firms mentioned

    
  • Boies, Schiller & Flexner

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • American Express Co.
  • Alameda Co.
  • Superior Court
  • Folkenflik & McGerity
  • Richardson, Patrick, Westbrook & Brickman

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Court Officials Seek to Reform Process of Naming Acting Justices
    •      
  2. The 2013 Am Law 100
    •      
  3. Harvard Law Opens Applications to Juniors
    •      
  4. Prolific ADA Plaintiff Faces Nemesis in Harassment Suit
    •      
  5. Lawyers Sanctioned Over Porn Lawsuits File Appeal
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

EEOC Gets Tough With Companies on Genetic Privacy

Retailers Facing Employment Law Vulnerabilities

Ex-Dewey Partners Face New Foe in Firm's Bankruptcy

S&C Adds Linklaters Restructuring Partner in London
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Cisco E-Book Delivers Ethics on the Go

Collaboration Is Key to Defending Cyberattacks

Prolific ADA Plaintiff Faces Nemesis in Harassment Suit

Ullyot Exit Closes Chapter for Facebook

Fla. Attorneys Lead Force-Placed Insurance Fight

Lawsuit Names Missing Fla. Attorney for Alleged Fraud
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Loaner Judges Helping Essex Cope With Persistent Vacancies
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Surrogate Faces Suspension for Political Activity, Drunken Driving
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Circuit Reinstates Lawsuit by Inmate Over Cell Conditions
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Custody Ruling in Bitter Fight May Turn on 11-Year-Old's Wish
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Castille Testifies in Favor of 'Civil Gideon' Funding

Workers' Comp Judges Can't Fight Rescinded Raise
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Advising Clients on Weather and the Workplace
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Texas Sues BP, Others Over Deepwater Oil Spill Disaster
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Filing Blunder To Cost $142,600
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court: Injured College Student Can't Sue State
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media