Class Action Lawsuits Against Insurance Companies

Consumer Class Actions

As a consumer do you feel that a company has misrepresented to you: the fees it is collecting; the effectiveness of its product; the safety of its product; the ingredients of its product; or anything else about its products or services? If so, then a class action may be appropriate to prevent the company from harming all consumers with its improper business practices.

For instance, Michael L. Cohen and its co-counsel represented approximately 48,000 people who had paid to join Kimkins.com, a website for dieters. The site peddled a diet that was essentially little better than anorexia. Many of the women who stuck with the diet for any length of time lost their hair. Others stopped menstruating. The superior court certified for class treatment claims for violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law, or UCL (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq.), and for common law fraud. In October 2010, this case was tried as a nationwide consumer class action in Riverside Superior Court.

After hearing the evidence, the court determined that the defendants had violated the UCL and had committed fraud and ordered the defendants to pay restitution of more than $1.8 million. The court also ordered the defendants liable for $500,000 in exemplary (punitive) damages and issued a sweeping injunction against the defendants. The injunction prevents this company from continuing to harm any consumer not just those who brought the lawsuit.

Insurance companies are supposed to protect us from harm and financial loss, but who protects us from insurance companies when they are the ones doing the harm?

At the law firm of Michael L. Cohen, we have decades of experience successfully litigating class action lawsuits against companies that neglect their responsibilities. Whether it’s a mega-insurance company or a giant pharmaceutical that’s made false claims about drugs that have led to death or illness, we have the skills, experience, and passion to help make things right.

When corporations break the law, they don’t just hurt one person; they usually harm a whole group of people. Protecting the rights of those people in class action lawsuits is what we at Cohen McKeon do best. We help ensure that companies live up to their responsibilities and that they honor their obligations of implied covenant and good-faith fair dealing to all the people in a class that they have injured.

At no cost to the plaintiffs, we file class action lawsuits on behalf of people like you who have been injured by the unlawful or unfair actions of corporations. We put action into class action.

Our attorneys are also expert at litigating consumer class actions against companies whose products have harmed consumers and against employers whose actions have violated the rights of their workers.

When it comes to the law, we’re on your side.

Class Actions Litigation Case Results

Fenderson et al. v. Diaz et al. 
Michael L. Cohen and its co-counsel represented approximately 48,000 people who had paid to join Kimkins.com, a Web site for dieters. The site peddled a diet that was essentially little better than anorexia. Many of the women who stuck with the diet for any length of time lost their hair. Others stopped menstruating. The superior court certified for class treatment claims for violations of California’s Unfair Competition Law, or UCL (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq.), and for common law fraud—which is unusual, because courts rarely certify fraud claims for class treatment. In October 2010, this case was actually tried as a nationwide consumer class action in Riverside Superior Court. Michael was co-lead trial counsel in this case. After hearing the evidence, the Court determined that the defendants had violated the UCL and had committed fraud and ordered the defendants to pay restitution of more than $1.8 million. The Court also ordered the defendants liable for $500,000 in exemplary (punitive) damages and issued a sweeping injunction against the defendants.

Katz et al v. Anthem Blue Cross 
The firm and its co-counsel represent a putative class of severely mentally ill Anthem insureds. In the class action, Katz alleges that Anthem has rigged a system that violates the Mental Health Parity Act. With the implementation of the Anthem’s Behavioral Health Outpatient Authorization Program, if a severely mentally ill member needs more than 12 visits a year of psychotherapy, that member must request and obtain authorization in advance, if the member wants Anthem to provide any payment for these sessions. The member’s request is then reviewed by Anthem’s “Behavioral Health Outpatient Team” and the company’s “Utilization Management” team. Katz also alleges that this review process is designed to limit each member 12 visits per year regardless of the seriousness of their illness. Because Anthem does not impose these restrictions on benefits for subscribers and members with other injuries or illnesses, Anthem’s program violates the state’s Mental Health Parity Act.