Claim a $35 or $85 Voucher Wilson DeMarini White Steel Bat Class Action Settlement

Who is a Class Member

You are included in the Wilson DeMarini White Steel Bat class action settlement if you purchased one or more new 13/14 White Steels from Wilson or an authorized dealer of Wilson in the United States from December 23, 2011 through June 6, 2018.

If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other class action settlements you may be eligible for.


Estimated Award

  • Voucher for $35 or $85 depending on warranty claim

Class members who purchased a new 13/14 White Steel bat and completed a warranty claim with Wilson will receive a $85 Wilson Voucher.

Class members who initiated but did not complete the warranty process and provided Wilson with their contact information, proof of purchase and indicated the White Steel was the reason for their claim will also receive a $85 Wilson Voucher.

Class members who did not start or complete a warranty claim will receive a $35 Wilson Voucher as long as they can show proof of purchase.


Proof of Purchase

  • You will need to provide documentation you purchased a White Steel bat, such as a receipt, credit card statement, pictures, or prior contact with Wilson regarding the softball bat.

Claim Form

  • class action lawsuits

Wilson DeMarini White Steel Bat Settlement Notes

  • Hiroyuki Oda, et al. v. Wilson Sporting Goods Co.
  • Case No. 8:15-cv-02131
  • Pending in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California

In December 2015, several named plaintiffs filed this class action lawsuit against Wilson Sporting Goods asserting claims that Wilson’s Demarini White Steel softball bats were more prone to crack and break during normal use than other generations of the same bat model.

Specifically, the plaintiffs allege that the bats (known as the 13/14 White Steel bats) “fail prematurely due to common defects” that include the chemical composition of the steel, an improperly placed seam in the middle of the barrel, insufficient thickness of the wall, and Wilson’s lack of quality control. The lawsuit contends Wilson violated California and federal laws by failing to disclose the alleged defects with the softball bats and complying with its express warranty.

Wilson contends that the 13/14 White Steels were properly designed and manufactured, and that the vast majority of them did not fail prematurely, and denies all allegations. Complete details about the case and settlement are provided on the Wilson DeMarini White Steel Bat settlement website.

Class members who wish to object to or exclude themselves from the Wilson DeMarini White Steel Bat settlement must do so by August 20, 2018. Class members who wish to participate in the settlement must submit a claim form on or before August 20, 2018.


Important Dates

  • 8/20/18: Claim Form Deadline
  • 8/20/18: Objection or Exclusion Deadline
  • 10/19/18: Final Hearing at 2:30 pm PT* (class members do not need to attend this hearing in order to receive a slice of the settlement pie).

*Settlement Class Members who wish to speak at the hearing should check www.WhiteSteelSettlement.com to confirm that the date or time of the Hearing has not been changed.


Contact Information

  • Mail: Wilson-Demarini 2013/14 White Steel Bats Settlement, c/o KCC Class Action Services, P.O. Box 404000, Louisville, KY 40233-4000
  • Phone: 1-877-468-0441
  • Email: info@WhiteSteelSettlement.com

Class Counsel


Settlement Website

$36M Lumber Liquidators Laminate Flooring Class Action Settlement

Who is a Class Member

You are included in the Lumber Liquidators Laminate Flooring class action settlement “if you are a person in the United States who purchased Chinese-made laminate flooring (“Class Flooring”) from Lumber Liquidators between January 1, 2009 and May 31, 2015.”

If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other class action settlements you may be eligible for.


Settlement Amount

  • $36,000,000.00

Estimated Award

  • VARIES

The Settlement provides 3 possible benefits to class members, depending on which Class you fall into:

CARB2/Durability Class (purchases of Class Flooring from January 1, 2011 to May 31, 2015): Eligible class members can receive a portion of their purchase price (excluding installation and labor costs) back in cash, or a store credit voucher that can be used at Lumber Liquidators. Class members selecting the cash award may expect to receive about 20% – 56% of the purchase price of their flooring—this does not include the cost of installation. Class members selecting to receive a voucher can expect 38% -104% of their purchase price.

CARB1 Class (purchases of Class Flooring from January 1, 2009 to December 31, 2010): Eligible class members who file a timely and valid claim can receive a payment of up to $50. There is no store credit voucher option for this Class. If eligible claims exceed $1.0 million such that funds are insufficient to pay eligible CARB1 Claimants $50 each, the award will be allocated on a pro rata basis: this means the final amount each participant receives will be reduced if too many claimants participate.

Both Classes (purchasers of Class Flooring during both the time periods): Class Members who made purchases of the laminate flooring in both the CARB1 and CARB2/Durability time periods are eligible to participate in both settlement classes.


Proof of Purchase

  • You will need to provide proof that you purchased the Chinese-made laminate flooring from Lumber Liquidators between January 1, 2009 through May 31, 2015.

Claim Form

  • class action lawsuits

Lumber Liquidators Laminate Flooring Settlement Notes

  • In re: Lumber Liquidators Chinese-Manufactured Laminate Flooring Products Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, Case No. 1:15-md-02627 (AJT)
  • In re: Lumber Liquidators Chinese-Manufactured Laminate Flooring Durability Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, Case No. 1:16-md-02743 (AJT)
  • Both pending in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, Alexandria Division

The Lumber Liquidators laminate flooring settlement resolves two class action lawsuits, alleging that the Chinese-made laminate flooring sold by Lumber Liquidators had illegal levels of formaldehyde. Exposure to high levels of formaldehyde can cause respiratory problems, irritation of the eyes, nose, throat, and can increase the risk of cancer.

Since 2015, a number of Lumber Liquidator flooring lawsuits have been filed following a 60 Minutes segment that inspired several federal investigations into whether the laminate flooring contained harmful amounts of formaldehyde. Lumber Liquidators stopped selling the Chinese-made laminate flooring and paid a $2.5 million fine. The company also continues to provide air quality testing kits to consumers who had the laminate flooring in their homes.

It is estimated more than 700,000 people purchased the laminate flooring. Complete details about the case and settlement are provided on the Lumber Liquidators Laminate Flooring settlement website.

Class members who wish to object to or exclude themselves from the Lumber Liquidators Laminate Flooring settlement must do so by September 4, 2018. Class members who wish to participate in the settlement must submit a claim form on or before October 13, 2018.


Important Dates

  • 10/13/18: Claim Form Deadline
  • 9/4/18: Objection or Exclusion Deadline
  • 10/3/18: Final Hearing at 10:00 am ET* (class members do not need to attend this hearing in order to receive a slice of the settlement pie).

*Settlement Class Members who wish to speak at the hearing should check www.LaminateSettlement.com to confirm that the date or time of the Hearing has not been changed.


Contact Information

  • Mail: Laminate Settlement, Settlement Administrator – Angeion Group, 1801 Market Street, Suite 660, Philadelphia, PA 19103
  • Phone: 1-855-728-9632
  • Email: LaminateSettlement@AdministratorClassAction.com

Class Counsel


Settlement Website

Remington Firearms Class Action Settlement

Who is a Class Member

The Remington Firearms class action settlement includes:

  • “Current owners of Remington Model 700, Seven, Sportsman 78, 673, 710, 715, 770, 600, 660, XP-100, 721, 722, and 725 firearms containing a Remington trigger mechanism that utilizes a trigger connector;
  • Current owners of Remington Model 700 and Model Seven rifles containing an X-Mark Pro trigger mechanism manufactured from May 1, 2006 to April 9, 2014 who did not participate in the voluntary X-Mark Pro product recall prior to April 14, 2015; and
  • Current and former owners of Remington Model 700 and Model Seven rifles who replaced their rifle’s original Walker trigger mechanism with an X-Mark Pro trigger mechanism.”

If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other class action settlements you may be eligible for.


Estimated Award

  • VARIES

There are three options available to Settlement Class Members:

  1. Have the trigger mechanism retrofitted with a new X-Mark Pro or other connectorless trigger mechanism at no cost
  2. Receive a voucher code for Remington products redeemable at Remington’s online store; and/or
  3. Be refunded the money you spent to replace your Model 700 or Seven’s original Walker trigger mechanism with an X-Mark Pro trigger mechanism.

Proof of Purchase

  • N/A

Claim Form

  • class action lawsuits

Remington Firearms Settlement Notes

  • Ian Pollard v. Remington Arms Company LLC
  • Case No. 4:13-cv-00086-ODS
  • Pending in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, Western Division

Plaintiff Ian Pollard filed this class action lawsuit alleging that the trigger mechanisms in certain Remington firearms are defective. Specifically, Pollard claims that the trigger can accidentally discharge without being pulled and as such use of the firearms is “diminished”.

Additionally, the Remington Firearms class action lawsuit contends that from May 1, 2006 to April 9, 2014, the assembly process for theX-Mark Pro trigger mechanism was faulty and led to an excess amount of bonding agent, which caused Model 700 or Seven rifles to discharge without a trigger pull.

Remington has voluntarily recalled the affected rifles which has been ongoing for two years to address the issue but denies the allegations in this case and maintains that the value and utility of its firearms has not been diminished. Complete details about the case and settlement are provided on the Remington Firearms settlement website.


Important Dates

The Remington Firearms Class Action Settlement was granted final approval on March 14, 2017. However, an appeal has been filed against the settlement, meaning claims will not be paid until all appeals are exhausted. Claim forms must be submitted within 18 months of the Settlement effective date and Class members should check www.RemingtonFirearmsClassActionSettlement.com regularly to confirm deadlines and the effective date of the settlement.


Contact Information

  • Mail: Angeion Group, Attn: Remington Claims, Suite 660, 1801 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103
  • Phone: 1-800-876-5940

Class Counsel


Settlement Website

Claim $20 or 30% of Property Damage Durapro Toilet Connector Class Action Settlement

Who is a Class Member

You are included in the Durapro Toilet Connector class action settlement if you “own or owned, or lease or leased, a residence or other structure in the United States containing an eligible DuraPro Toilet Connector with a plastic Coupling Nut. This also includes any person or entity that suffers or has suffered Property Damage caused by the failure of a plastic Coupling Nut on a DuraProToilet Connector.”

If you don’t qualify for this settlement, check out our database of other class action settlements you may be eligible for.


Settlement Amount

  • $16,500,000.00

Estimated Award

  • Up to $20 Per Toilet Connector or Up to 30% of Property Damage

Replacement of DuraPro Toilet Connector: For eligible claims submitted within two years of final approval of the Settlement, Claimants can receive a cash payment of $4 for each DuraPro Toilet Connector (up to 5 Toilet Connectors per residence or other structure) that they replace. The maximum cash payment for replacement of Toilet Connectors is $20.

Payment of Property Damage Due to Failure: Claimants can recover up to 30% of documented costs of repairs for Property Damage caused by the failure of a plastic Coupling Nut on a DuraPro Toilet Connector, with a minimum recovery of $4.


Proof of Purchase

Replacement of DuraPro Toilet Connector: You will need to provide evidence that the residence or other structure contained a Toilet Connector, such as (i) the Toilet Connector itself; (ii) a photograph of the Toilet Connector; or (iii) other form of proof satisfactory to the Claims Administrator.

Payment of Property Damage Due to Failure: To support your Damage Claim, you must submit any photographs of the Toilet Connector and Coupling Nut; labels, packaging, and purchase receipts; and reports that describe the cause of the loss. You will also need to submit documentation including receipts, invoices, estimates for damages not covered by insurance, explanation of benefits letters, proof of payment for all expenses not covered by an insurance carrier, and the amount of any deductible you paid.


Claim Form

  • class action lawsuits

DuraPro Toilet Connector Settlement Notes

  • Jacqueline D. Ajose, et al. v. Interline Brands Inc.
  • Case No. 14-cv-01707
  • Pending in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee

In August 2015, six named plaintiffs filed this amended class action lawsuit against Interline Brands over allegations the company manufactured and sold defective DuraPro Toilet Connectors, which caused substantial water damage to consumers’ property. Specifically, the complaint alleges that Interline knew about the defective condition of their DuraPro Toilet Connectors’ plastic coupling nuts.

In plaintiff Jacquelyn D. Ajose’s case, after returning home, she discovered that Interline’s DuraPro brand Toilet Connector failed in a third floor bathroom causing water to run unabated throughout her home. As a result of the Toilet Connectors’ failure, Ajose suffered major out-of-pocket damages including, but not limited to, payment of her property insurance deductible. Similar experiences were echoed by other plaintiffs.

Interline denies the allegations but agreed to settle the case for $16.5 million. Complete details about the case and settlement are provided on the DuraPro Toilet Connector settlement website.

Class members who wish to object to or exclude themselves from the DuraPro Toilet Connector settlement must do so by August 20, 2018. The deadline to file a claim will be 2 years after the final approval order (10/19/2020). Class members who wish to file a claim for property damage can do so for four years after the final approval order (10/19/2022).


Important Dates

  • 8/20/18: Objection or Exclusion Deadline
  • 10/19/18: Final Hearing at 1:00 pm CT* (class members do not need to attend this hearing in order to receive a slice of the settlement pie).

*Settlement Class Members who wish to speak at the hearing should check www.DuraProToiletConnectorSettlement.com to confirm that the date or time of the Hearing has not been changed.


Contact Information

  • Mail: Ajose v. Interline Claims Administrator, c/o Epiq, P.O. Box 2876, Portland, OR 97208-2876
  • Phone: 1-855-349-6393
  • Email: info@DuraProToiletConnectorSettlement.com

Class Counsel


Settlement Website