• About Us
  • Korein Tillery
  • Offices
  • News and Awards
  • Employment
  • Resources
• Practice Areas
  • Consumer Rights
  • ERISA/Pension Fund Litigation
  • Environmental Litigation
  • Tobacco Litigation
  • Appellate
  • Class Actions
  • False Claims Act
  • Pharmaceutical/Health Care
  • Product Liability
  • Securities Litigation
  • Telecommunications
• Attorneys
  • Sandor Korein
  • Stephen Tillery
  • Steven Katz
  • Douglas Sprong
  • Christine Moody
  • Stephen Swedlow
  • George Zelcs
  • Robert King
  • John Hoffman
  • Aaron Zigler
  • Peter Rachman
  • Howard Becker
  • Diane Moore Heitman
  • Christie Deaton
  • Max Gibbons
  • John Libra
  • Alexis Tillery
  • Klint Bruno
  • Christopher Hoffman
  • Katherine Tillery
  • Aidan McNamara
  • Michael Klenov
  • Matthew Davies
• Cases
  • Representative
  • Verdicts and Settlements

• Consumer Rights
• ERISA/Pension Fund Litigation
• Environmental Litigation
• Tobacco Litigation
• Appellate
• Class Actions
• False Claims Act
• Pharmaceutical/Health Care
• Product Liability
• Securities Litigation
• Telecommunications

Class Actions Attorneys

• Stephen Tillery
• Douglas Sprong
• Christine Moody
• Stephen Swedlow
• George Zelcs
• Robert King
• John Hoffman
• Aaron Zigler
• Howard Becker
• Diane Moore Heitman
• Christie Deaton
• Max Gibbons
• John Libra
• Klint Bruno
• Christopher Hoffman
• Michael Klenov
• Matthew Davies

Korein Tillery's class action practice spans a wide variety of cases across the country, including insurance, securities, antitrust, pension funds, products liability, environmental, tobacco, computer technology and consumer fraud cases.  Although many law firms "handle" class actions, very few have the resources and experience to prosecute class actions as vigorously as they are defended.  We consider it our mission to outclass the defense in every case, and our results speak for themselves: KT has generated more than $11 billion in class action verdicts and recovery funds in the last three years alone.

Representative Matters

Courts have appointed KT as class counsel in over 50 cases, including:

Price v. Philip Morris Inc., 2003 WL 22597608 (Ill.Cir. Mar 21, 2003), rev'd, 848 N.E.2d 1 (Ill. Dec 15, 2005), reh'g denied, 846 N.E.2d 597 (Ill. May 5, 2006), cert. denied, 127 S.Ct. 685 (Nov. 27, 2006).  The seven-week trial of Price in 2003 brought together preeminent leaders of the world public health community in support of an Illinois consumer fraud case challenging the use of the word "light" as a deceptive low-tar cigarette descriptor.  In this first ever judgment rendered in a light cigarette fraud case, Korein Tillery obtained a $10.1 billion verdict ($7.1 billion compensatory and $3 billion punitive) in this class action lawsuit alleging fraud in the marketing of Marlboro Lights and Cambridge Lights cigarettes.  Plaintiffs accused Philip Morris of misleading the Illinois class of consumers by packaging cigarettes as "Lights" and claiming that these cigarettes contain "lower tar and nicotine than regular cigarettes." The court agreed, holding not only that these "Lights" cigarettes deliver the same amount of tar and nicotine and are therefore just as harmful as a regular cigarettes, but also that the "Lights" cigarettes actually deliver more of the most toxic substances to smokers than regular cigarettes. On appeal, Stephen A. Swedlow argued the case before the Illinois Supreme Court.

Sparks, et al. v. AT&T Corporation and Lucent Technologies, Inc., No. 96-LM-983 (Ill.Cir.Ct. Aug. 9, 2002).  Korein Tillery filed this nationwide class action against AT&T and Lucent Technologies in 1996 to remedy their practice of deceptively leasing telephone sets to residential consumers.  In 1984, AT&T began independently charging leasing fees to residential customers for the telephone sets that customers received when they first obtained telephone service. AT&T continued to charge residential customers the monthly lease charges by sending a quarterly bill for "leased equipment" without identifying the fact that the leased equipment was a telephone set, the quantity of sets supposedly being leased, or the style of the sets. Many customers continued to pay the bill over the intervening 15 years believing that AT&T was charging for access to long-distance telephone service.  In 2001, the trial court certified a class of more than 20 million people making the action one of the largest class actions ever certified.  In litigation spanning seven years, including numerous appeals, Korein Tillery attorneys deposed more than 150 corporate designees and fact witnesses and reviewed and catalogued more than 3.2 million pages of documents. The parties reached a settlement on the eve of trial in which the defendants agreed to pay up to $300 million in cash to the class members with another $50 million distributed to charities.

Esden v. Bank of Boston Retirement Plan, 229 F.3d 154 (2nd Cir. 2000).  The first case to successfully challenge case balance type defined benefit plans, this matter required Korein Tillery attorneys Douglas R. Sprong and Steven A. Katz to navigate the complex parallel statutory provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, ERISA and its regulations to remedy the improper reduction of pension benefits by the defendant. This groundbreaking ERISA class action formed the basis for reinstatement of hundreds of millions of dollars in retirement benefits in matters litigated throughout the country. The Second Circuit decision has become a watershed case in ERISA law as it clarifies how retirement benefits must be calculated in cash balance pension plans. The case ultimately settled for approximately $7 million

Berger v. Xerox Retirement Income Guar. Plan, 231 F.Supp.2d 804 (S.D.Ill. Sep. 30, 2002), aff'd, 338 F.3d 755 (7th Cir. Aug. 1, 2003).  Following their victory in Esden, Korein Tillery attorneys contested the legality of Xerox's cash balance pension plan on behalf of a class of its retirees and obtained a $255 million judgment for the class. The Seventh Circuit affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that Xerox's cash balance plan violated ERISA by, among other things, failing to include the value of future interest credits up through a plan participant's normal retirement date in valuing the participant's lump sum pension benefit.  The case eventually settled, and more than 15,000 Xerox retirees will share in the $239 million settlement fund Korein Tillery lawyers negotiated for the Class.

Cooper v. IBM Personal Pension Plan, 274 F.Supp.2d 1010 (S.D. Ill. 2003).  Representing a class of IBM retirees, Korein Tillery challenged IBM's pension equity plan on the grounds that it violated ERISA's prohibition against age discrimination.  The trial court entered summary judgment for the Plaintiff Class on the issue of liability.  After obtaining class certification and summary judgment in favor of the class, Korein Tillery obtained a $324 million settlement for the class. This case, along with Berger, received an enormous amount of national media attention and is a watershed in ERISA litigation. 

Malloy v. Ameritech Pension Plan, 2000 WL 35525477 (S.D.Ill. Feb. 07, 2000).  Korein Tillery attorneys Douglas R. Sprong and Steven A. Katz challenged the mortality table used by the plan to calculate payments to those plan participants who, upon termination of employment, elected to receive their pension benefits in the form of a lump sum distribution rather than a monthly annuity benefit as violative of ERISA. Plaintiffs claimed that the plan was required by its terms to use a different mortality table than that which it in fact used.  KT recovered approximately $185 million in pension benefits for 17,000 former Ameritech employees whose pension benefits were miscalculated.  Class members each received an average of $8,000.00 in additional pension benefits.

Williams v. Rohm & Haas Pension Plan, 497 F.3d 710 (7th Cir. 2007).  The Plaintiff Class, represented by Korein Tillery attorney Douglas R. Sprong, alleged that the Rohm and Haas Pension Plan violated ERISA by failing to include a cost-of-living adjustment in lump sum distributions from the Plan.  Following class certification, Korein Tillery obtained summary judgment in favor of the class. On August 14, 2007 the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the district court's order granting plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and denying the pension plan's cross-motion for summary judgment.  The Seventh Circuit agreed that the pension plan violated ERISA by failing to include the value of a cost-of-living adjustment in the class members' lump sum distributions. The Court remanded the case to the district court so that class members' lump sum benefits could be recalculated to include the value of the cost-of-living-adjustment.  The Plan's Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the United States Supreme Court was denied in May 2008.  Click to view the Class Action Settlement Agreement or the Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement Agreement. 

UPDATE:  On April 12, 2010, Judge Sarah Evans Barker entered an Order approving the Class Settlement.  Click to view the Final Order Approving Class Settlement and Denying Pending Motions.   Several class members have appealed the Judge’s decision; therefore, settlement benefits will not be disbursed in September, 2010.   We do not expect to have additional information before the first quarter of 2011.

Hoormann v. SmithKline Beecham, 04-L-715 (Ill.Cir.Ct. May 17, 2007).  Lead Counsel: Stephen M. Tillery, Stephen A. Swedlow and Aaron M. Zigler.  In July 2004, Korein Tillery filed suit on behalf of a nationwide class of purchasers alleging that SmithKline Beecham promoted Paxil® and Paxil CR^TM for prescription to children and adolescents despite having actual knowledge that these drugs exposed children and adolescents to dangerous side effects while failing to treat their symptoms.  Following three years of litigation, Korein Tillery obtained a settlement that established a $63.8 million fund to reimburse class members 100% of their out-of-pocket expenses. In contrast, the New York Attorney General's office settled their lawsuit concerning the same conduct for a $2.5 million fine.

Prather v. Pfizer Inc., 02-L-480 (Ill.Cir.Ct. Dec. 2, 2004).  Lead Counsel: Stephen M. Tillery and Aaron M. Zigler.  Following the withdrawal from the market of the anti-diabetes prescription drug Rezulin (which was advertised as a "breakthrough new drug" that was as "safe as a placebo"), Korein Tillery filed suit against Pfizer, and its subsidiary, Warner-Lambert, alleging that the defendants engaged in unfair business conduct relating to their advertising and pricing.  Over the course of the three years that Rezulin was on the market, many people died and many more were seriously injured as a result of its use.  Because of the harmful effects of Rezulin, thousands of personal injury cases and 50 class action cases were filed.  Of the fifty Rezulin class actions, this was the only action to lead to any recovery.  The success of this theory changed the landscape of pharmaceutical litigation.  The settlement that was reached did not face a single objection and established a fund of $60 million to pay plaintiffs a cash award of 85% of their out-of-pocket expenses for Rezulin and to pay an additional $20 million cy pres award to finance diabetes research.  The cy pres was distributed as follows:

• $5,000,000 to the University of Chicago School of Medicine, Diabetes Research Center;
• $5,000,000 to Centers for Disease Control, Illinois Diabetes Prevention and Control program, Illinois Department of Human Services;
• $5,000,000 to Illinois Institute of Technology, Engineering Center for Diabetes Research and Education;
• $2,000,000 to Lubavitch Chabad of Illinois;
• $3,000,000 to United Way of Metropolitan Chicago.

Adapted from trust and estate law, "cy pres" allows for distribution of unclaimed damage awards in class-action lawsuits where it is not possible to determine each plaintiff's actual damages or when plaintiffs fail to collect their portion of the award. See Ameet Sachdev, Charities reaping lawsuit dividends, Chicago Tribune, September 9, 2007.  The settlement was reported as the largest settlement or verdict in Illinois in 2004.  This settlement was used on the floor of the Senate as an example of why state court class actions serve the public good. See 150 Cong. Rec. 92, S7714-17 (July 7, 2004 statement of Sen. Durbin); 151 Cong. Rec. 12, S1082-85 (February 8, 2005 statement of Sen. Durbin).

Laurenzano v. Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Mass. Ret. Income Trust, 134 F.Supp. 2d 189 (D.Mass. 2001).  Under the benefit plan at issue in this class action, a participant's normal retirement benefit was a life annuity beginning at age sixty-five, increased every year to include a cost-of-living adjustment payment that reflected changes in the Consumer Price Index.  Rather than receive a life annuity, the Plaintiff elected to receive the present value of his pension in a single, lump sum distribution. When the Plaintiff received his lump sum distribution, however, it did not include the present value of the projected cost-of-living adjustment payments.  Korein Tillery attorneys Douglas R. Sprong and Steven A. Katz served as class counsel and successfully obtained class certification and pressed a motion for judgment on the written record while successfully defeating the defendant's same motion.  KT recovered approximately $18 million for BCBS retirees.

Clevenger v. Dillards, Inc., 412 F. Supp. 2d 832 (S.D. Ohio 2006).  The Plaintiff in this case accrued substantial benefits under a benefit plan that was terminated the year her employer was sold to Dillards. Represented by Korein Tillery, she claimed the manner in which lump sum benefits were calculated under the plan and its late amendments violated ERISA.  Defendants filed a third party complaint against the company that calculated the annuities and lump sum distributions.  Korein Tillery attorneys defeated motions to dismiss and motions for judgment on the pleadings. Subsequently, Korein Tillery obtained a settlement of $35 million in additional benefits for the class.

Tullock v. K-Mart Employees Retirement Plan, 183 F.Supp.2d 1094 (S.D. Ill. 2001).  Korein Tillery represented participants in K-Mart's employee retirement plan who alleged that lump sum distributions from the plan violated ERISA because they were computed using the wrong interest rate. KT successfully obtained class certification and prevailed on summary judgment with respect to the question of ERISA liability. The case settled for $1.25 million.

Folkerts, et al. v. Illinois Bell, et al., No. 95-L-912 (Ill.Cir.Ct. Jan. 7, 1998).  Korein Tillery brought this action, on behalf of Ameritech's Illinois customers, to remedy Ameritech's practice of adding inside-wire maintenance charges to the bills of customers who had not requested such a service.  A team of Korein Tillery attorneys took dozens of depositions and reviewed millions of documents pursuing the case. After three years of litigation the case settled for $175,000,000.

Joiner v. Ameritech Mobile Communications, Inc., No. 96-L-121 (Ill.Cir.Ct. Aug. 8, 2000).  Korein Tillery attorneys were appointed Class Counsel in this consumer fraud and breach of contract case against Ameritech Mobile brought as a result of its practice of charging customers for one full minute of airtime for each portion of a minute used. In December 2000, Korein Tillery negotiated the largest settlement of any cellular phone "round-up" case in the nation. Korein Tillery was involved in and settled similar litigation against Southwestern Bell Mobile in 1998.

Parker v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., No. 04-L-716 (Ill.Cir.Ct. Jan. 16, 2007).  Korein Tillery brought this action against Sears in 2004 to remedy Sears' failure to install anti-tip safety devices, which prevent ranges from tipping over and severely burning or injuring unsuspecting consumers, on ranges that it sold, delivered and set-up in customers' homes.  In the 1960's and 1970's, kitchen range manufacturers started reducing the weight of metal in an effort to competitively lower the price of kitchen ranges. Over the course of several years, advances in materials allowed manufacturers to produce ranges which were durable and which were extremely light weight.  However, because the oven doors on the front of the ranges serve as a lever and fulcrum, the light weight of the new ranges created an extremely dangerous tipping hazard.  For example, if a person were to place a turkey roaster on an open and horizontal oven door, the added weight would cause these newly designed ranges to tip forward spilling the hot contents onto anyone standing in the vicinity.  Children who opened and used the range door as a step could unwillingly tip boiling liquids onto themselves. Over the last several years dozens of people have been killed and hundreds have been maimed as a result of this problem.

Recognizing the need for a solution to this dangerous hazard, manufacturers and regulators began requiring installing of an anti-tip bracket that could be attached to the wall or floor at the back end of the range preventing any forward tipping and maintaining complete stability.  The installation is simple and the lightweight bracket costs pennies.  The rule making bodies of most codes (BOCA Code, National Electrical Code; numerous other industry codes) thereafter required the installation of anti-tip brackets in all range installations in the United States.  Even Sears acknowledged that a properly installed anti-tip bracket completely eliminates the hazards of tipping stoves.

Sears, Roebuck & Company has been the largest retail seller of kitchen ranges in the United States - averaging more than 800,000 ranges sold every year.  When selling a gas or electric range Sears generally includes delivery, installation and hookup in customers' homes, thus, Sears became the largest installer of kitchen ranges in the United States.  To increase its profits, Sears adopted a policy of refusing to install anti-tip brackets during normal installation unless the customer agreed to incur a substantial cost.  At the same time, Sears failed to disclose the hazards associated with forgoing anti-tip bracket installation.

In January 2008 the Court granted final approval of a settlement which provided complete relief to the class by requiring Sears to install anti-tip brackets for the affected members of the class as well as requiring the installation of such brackets in the future. The settlement is valued at more than $544,500,000.

This settlement was touted by the public interest organization Public Citizen as an example as to how consumer class actions benefit society.  Public Citizen nominated Stephen Tillery as Trial Lawyers for Public Justice's Trial Lawyer of the Year based upon his role in this case

Barbara's Sales, Inc. v. Intel Corp., 227 Ill. 2d 45 (2007).  In this matter Korein Tillery sought to represent a class of consumers who purchased personal computers containing Pentium 4 processors, alleging that the defendants engaged in consumer fraud by concealing from the purchasers that the Pentium 4 was not any faster or otherwise superior to the Pentium III.  Plaintiffs asked that a class be certified including all purchasers of Pentium 4 computers within the United States and applying California law to the defendants' conduct on the ground that the defendants' wrongful conduct occurred in that state.  After the trial court certified a class action restricting the class to Illinois purchasers and applying Illinois law, the plaintiffs appealed.  The appellate court reversed, agreeing with Korein Tillery that a nationwide class was appropriate and that California law should apply.  On appeal, Stephen A. Swedlow of Korein Tillery argued the case before the Illinois Supreme Court.

Call v. Ameritech Management Pension Plan, 475 F.3d 816 (7th Cir. 2007).  When a participant in a defined-benefit pension plan is given a choice between taking pension benefits as an annuity or in a lump sum, the lump sum must be so calculated as to be the actuarial equivalent of the annuity.  Plaintiff brought this class action alleging that Ameritech's plan amendment, specifying two options for calculating lump-sum distribution amounts, violated the plan's own anti-cutback provision.  Korein Tillery attorney Douglas R. Sprong obtained a judgment on behalf of the Plaintiff Class in excess of $31 million.  The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment on January 9, 2007. Ameritech's appeal to the United States Supreme Court was denied on June 9, 2008. 

Rogers v. Tyson Foods Inc., No. 01-LM-1006 (Ill.Cir.Ct. Aug. 17, 2007).  Lead Counsel John W. Hoffman. (Add'l counsel: Watson, Jimmerson, Martin, McKinney, Graffeo & Helms, P.C.; J. Dudley Butler, P.A.; Whatley Drake, L.L.C.; Parry Deering Futscher & Sparks, P.S.C.).  In 2001, Korein Tillery filed suit against Tyson Foods, Inc., the largest poultry producer in the world, alleging it artificially inflated the weight of chicken sold to consumers through the infusion of water during processing.  The suit involved a complex interplay between federal regulations and state consumer protection laws concerning issues of federal preemption.  The Plaintiffs, represented by and Mr. Hoffman, won an important victory in the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals affirming the propriety of pursuing these claims in state court.  Rogers v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 308 F.3d 785 (7th Cir. 2002).  In August 2007, after years of contentious litigation, the trial court certified a plaintiffs' class of Illinois consumers.  This is believed to be the first such case and class certification of this type in the nation.  

Sullivan v. DB Investments, Inc., No. 04-2819 (D.N.J. May 22, 2008).  Co-lead Counsel: Steven A. Katz and Howard B. Becker. (Add'l Counsel: Berman DeValerio Pease Tabacco Burt & Pucillo; Law Office of John Maher; Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP; Law Offices of Francis O. Scarpulla; Cooper & Kirkham, P.C.; Zelle, Hofmann, Voelbel, Mason, & Gette LLP; Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP; Lovell Stewart Halebian LLP; Stamell & Schager, LLP; Meredith, Cohen, Greenfogel, & Skirnick, P.C.; and Sommer Barnard Attorneys, P.C.).  Beginning in 2004, several actions were filed against De Beers and its related companies alleging violations of federal antitrust law and various state antitrust and consumer protection laws on behalf of purchasers of polished diamonds.  Following its strategy of denying that U.S. Courts could maintain jurisdiction over it, De Beers refused to appear in any of these cases and defaults were entered against each of the defendants.

The entry of default, however, did not mean that plaintiffs litigated with no opposition.  Instead, counsel faced substantial opposition from intervenors and amici.  Furthermore, the entry of default did not eliminate the risk to the plaintiffs that De Beers could prevail on liability or damages.  Because De Beers defaulted, plaintiffs could not obtain formal discovery from De Beers and thus Plaintiffs were denied access to the means in which to prove anti-competitive conduct, damages and causation.  In addition, as the defendants are incorporated in the United Kingdom, South Africa, Luxembourg and Switzerland, enormous difficulties were believed to exist in seeking enforcement of a U.S. class action default judgment.

On July 22, 2005, Korein Tillery became the first firm to obtain certification of a nationwide class of diamond purchasers in Null v. D.B. Investments, Inc., No. 05-L-209 (Ill.Cir.Ct. July 22, 2005).  On May 22, 2008, in a consolidated proceeding in which Korein Tillery served as co-lead counsel, the district court approved a nationwide settlement that created a fund of $323 million to compensate diamond purchasers and provided additional injunctive relief to the class.  While this settlement is the culmination of numerous related lawsuits, Korein Tillery attorney Steven A. Katz was instrumental in the settlement discussions that began shortly after the entry of the Null certification order. 

Clutts v. Allstate Ins. Co., 02-L-226 (Ill.Cir.Ct. Dec. 6, 2005).  In this state-wide class action lawsuit against Allstate Insurance Company and Allstate Property & Casualty Company, Plaintiffs alleged that Allstate violated Illinois law by charging more to its insureds with prior non-standard coverage for auto insurance than it did others with the same risk factors solely because of the identity of their prior insurance carrier.  Plaintiffs also alleged that Allstate imposed the functional equivalent of a surcharge by denying discounts to policyholders based upon the fact the insured had prior non-standard coverage.  After comprehensive motion practice and discovery, the parties settled the action for more than $5 million, providing cash payments to the class members.

Wheeler v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 99-L-529 (Ill.Cir.Ct. Apr. 17, 2003).  Korein Tillery represented a Plaintiff class alleging that Sears, Roebuck & Co. offered for sale a 5-step wheel balancing service, known as "AccuBalance," advertised as a premium wheel balancing service over-and-above Sears' regular wheel balancing.  The service typically cost $12.50 per tire but Plaintiff alleged that Sears' employees routinely failed to perform the "tire-matching" portion of this service, despite payment for same by consumers.  John Hoffman assumed primary responsibility for this litigation and was instrumental in reaching a $10 million settlement on behalf of all persons in the United States who purchased the AccuBalance tire balancing service between 1989 and 1994.

In re MCI Non-Subscriber Tel. Rates Litig., MDL 1275 (S.D. Ill. Apr. 19, 2001).  MDL proceeding in the Southern District of Illinois that resulted in one of the largest telecom class action settlements ever, with a settlement fund of $90 million.

Gans v. Seventeen Motors, Inc., 01-L-478 (Ill.Cir.Ct. July 1, 2002).  Lead Counsel: Steven Katz and Diane Heitman.  In this class action, Korein Tillery represented the recipients of unsolicited advertising faxes pursuing claims under the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991.  The TCPA prohibits such conduct and allows for the recovery of actual damages or statutory damages of $500 per fax, which amount can be trebled by the court if the violation is willful or knowing.  Korein Tillery negotiated a $6.5 million settlement which provided class members with the statutorily appropriate compensation and substantial contributions to local charities under the cy pres doctrine.  At the time, this settlement was the largest "junk fax" settlement on record.

Fun Serv. of Kansas City, Inc. v. AMF Bowling, Inc., 03-DV-203690 (Mo.Cir.Ct. Apr. 22, 2005).  Lead Counsel: Steven Katz and Diane Heitman.  In this class action, Korein Tillery represented the recipients of unsolicited advertising faxes pursuing claims under the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991.  KT negotiated a settlement fund of $2.9 million, which provided compensation for each "junk fax" received and cy pres donations to charities protecting consumer rights.

Gans v. Leiserv, Inc., 02CC-002115 (Mo.Cir.Ct. Oct. 6, 2004).  Lead Counsel: Steven Katz and Diane Heitman.  In this class action, Korein Tillery again represented the recipients of unsolicited advertising faxes pursuing claims under the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991.  This "junk fax" case settled for $15.1 million. 

Little, LLC v. Brinker Missouri, Inc., 02CC-003965 (Mo.Cir.Ct. Sept. 23, 2005).  Lead Counsel: Steven Katz, Diane Heitman and Christopher Hoffman.  Little was also a "junk fax" case in St. Louis County, Missouri with claims under the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991.  After highly contested proceedings, the court certified a Plaintiff class and the case settled for $1.425 million.

Brentwood Travel v. DCT, a/k/a Papa John's Pizza, 03CC-2857 (Mo.CirCt. June 13, 2007).  Lead Counsel: Steven Katz, Diane Heitman and Christopher Hoffman.  The settlement of this "junk fax" case provided for a $4.85 million fund, with an excess insurer offering an additional $600k if claims exhausted the $4.85 mil fund created by the primary insurance carriers, and a provision for the distribution of monies to charity under cy pres if there are funds remaining after the payment of all claims. 

Mangone v. First USA Bank, N.A. and Bank One Corp., 00-881-MJR (S.D.Ill. Nov. 21, 2000).  Korein Tillery represented 18.5 million class members seeking redress for improper late charges on credit card statements. Korein Tillery's efforts resulted in a $40 million settlement fund.

Williams v. Con Agra, 97-L-373 (Ill.Cir.Ct. Oct. 31, 1997).  This class action involving misweighing and misgrading of grain at grain elevators settled for approximately $2.5 million.

May v. SmithKline Beecham Corp., 97-L-1230 (Ill.Cir.Ct.).  Korein Tillery negotiated a $20 million settlement for the class in a case involving improper laboratory testing charges. 

Nichols v. B.P. America Pension Plan, No. 01-C-6238 (N.D. Ill. July 15, 2002).  A $71 million settlement was obtained by Korein Tillery for approximately 20,000 former employees whose lump sum pension benefits were miscalculated. 

Patterson v. Nations Bk., 99-481-PER (S.D. Ill. July 29, 1999).  Korein Tillery's efforts resulted in a $9 million settlement for the class in a case involving a class of persons who incurred insufficient funds or overdraft charges as a result of the defendant's misconduct.

Berkowitz v. National Westminister Bancorp Ret. Plan, 2000 WL 852451 (D. Conn. March 30, 2000).  Connecticut District Court pension miscalculation case resulting in approximately $4 million to the putative class.

Pierce v. Gold Kist, No. CV-97-L-0748-5 (N.D.Ala. Aug. 11, 1997).  ERISA class action concerning miscalculated lump sum distributions.  The case settled for approximately $920,000.

Rice v. Nat'l Steel, 98-L-98 (Ill.Cir.Ct. Jun. 30, 1999).  Korein Tillery's efforts resulted in a $1.4 million settlement recovery in this class action involving underpayment of profit sharing plan bonuses.

Richardson v. Fairchild Space & Defense, No. 99-1867 (M.D. Pa. Oct. 9, 2001).  This ERISA class action regarding miscalculated lump sum distributions settled for approximately $740,000.

Synfuel Tech., v. Airborne Inc., 02-CV-324-DRH (S.D.Ill. Oct. 31, 2003).  Korein Tillery represented a plaintiff class suing Airborne alleging that the rate charged when Letter Express senders fail to fully complete an airbill constituted an illegal penalty.  KT negotiated a settlement that included monetary and injunctive relief valued by the district court at $35,440,560.

Vollmer v. PCH, 99-434-GPM (S.D.Ill. Jun. 30, 1999).  Korein Tillery represented plaintiffs in this case against sweepstakes giant Publishers Clearinghouse that resulted in a settlement which overhauled the sweepstakes practices of the industry and netted tens of millions of dollars in refunds. 

Wilgus v. Cybersource, 02-L-995 (Ill.Cir.Ct. Aug. 30, 2004).  Korein Tillery successfully certified a class of employees against their employer in an action alleging the employer had breached its employee stock option contracts.

Asbury v. May Department Store Co. Retirement Plan, No. 97-667-GPM (S.D. Ill. May 3, 1999).  Korein Tillery recovered $600,000 in pension benefits for retirees whose lump sum distributions were undervalued.

If you would like to contact an attorney regarding this area of law, please email your request to: contact@koreintillery.com