- Joined:
- May 15, 2010
- Posts:
- 3,802
- Liked Posts:
- 0
Sounds like the Process Ordering Fee Class Action Suit is going forward:
[quote name="Suckitticketbastard"]
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CURT SCHLESINGER and PETER LO RE, )
on behalf themselves and the Certified Class, ) No. BC304565
Plaintiffs, )
v. )
TICKETMASTER, a Delaware Corporation, )
Defendant. )
NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION
TO: All persons who purchased tickets using ticketmaster.com during the period from October 21, 1999 through May 31, 2010 and were residents of the United States at the time of the purchase.
PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY.
THIS IS NOT A NOTICE OF A LAWSUIT AGAINST YOU
WHAT THIS LAWSUIT IS ABOUT: Plaintiffs filed this case on October 21, 2003. The case is proceeding as a class action on behalf of United States residents. The claims challenge Ticketmaster’s Order Processing Fee and the fee it charges customers who select the UPS Delivery option on Ticketmaster’s website, www.ticketmaster.com (the “Website”), for ticket purchases made by United States residents over the Website between October 21, 1999 and May 31, 2010.
The purpose of the notice is to advise you about the class action, including your rights in connection with the case. This notice is not intended to be an expression of any opinion by the Court as to the merit of the claims or defenses in this case.
The Order Processing Fee Claim. Plaintiffs assert that Ticketmaster’s Order Processing Fee is deceptive and leads consumers to believe that it represents Ticketmaster’s costs to process their orders, and that the Order Processing Fee is just a profit component for Ticketmaster, unrelated to the costs of processing the orders. Ticketmaster disputes these allegationsand disputes that the Order Processing Fee is deceptive.
The UPS Delivery Claim. This claim is brought only on behalf of the Class members who selected and paid for the UPS Delivery option. Plaintiffs allege that Ticketmaster’sUPS Delivery option is deceptive because it leads consumers to believe the price they are paying Ticketmaster is a pass-through of the fees that UPS charges to Ticketmaster and that Ticketmaster substantially marks-up the amount it actually pays to UPS. Ticketmaster disputes these allegationsand disputes that its UPS Delivery option is deceptive.
The Honorable Kenneth R. Freeman has ordered that these claims, made under California’s False Advertising Law and Unfair Competition Law may proceed as a class action consisting of: all United States residents who purchased tickets using the Website during the period from October 21, 1999 through May 31, 2010 (the “Class”). The Court also ordered that a subclass consisting of those class members who also paid the UPS Delivery Price, may proceed as a class action (the “Subclass”). By allowing the Class and the Subclass to proceed as a class action, the Court has not made any determination about the merits of either claim. All Class members will be bound by the outcome of the Court’s ultimate ruling on the Order Processing Fee claim (unless they timely opt out of this case, as described below). All Subclass members will be bound by the outcome of the Court’s ultimate ruling on the UPS Delivery claim (unless they timely opt out of this case, as described below).
If Plaintiffs prevail on their claims, they will ask the Court to award appropriate relief, including requiring Ticketmaster to repay to each Class member any money that Ticketmaster has made as a result of any conduct found to be illegal. Ticketmaster disputes that its conduct is illegal and also disputes that the Class members are entitled to any refunds.
The Court has set the case for non-jury trial beginning January 26, 2011.
The Court has ordered that this notice be emailed to the Class members and publicized. This notice explains the nature of the lawsuit and informs the Class members of their legal rights.
YOUR OPTIONS: If you are a member of the Class and wish to remain in the suit and participate in any potential recovery, you DO NOT need to do anything at this time. You will be represented by the attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Class, who have taken the case on a contingency basis, meaning they will be paid only if they obtain a recovery for the Class. Any fee eventually paid to Plaintiffs’ counsel must be approved by the Court, which may require the payment to be deducted from any recovery obtained in this case, or paid by Ticketmaster, or both.
You have the right to exclude yourself from the class action by filing a written request for exclusion with the Notice Administrator either electronically at www.ticketfeelitigation.com or by mail sent to: Ticket Fee Litigation, Strategic Claims Services, 600 N. Jackson Street, Suite 3, Media, PA 19063. The notice of exclusion must be either postmarked or received (if sent by means other than U.S. mail) by the notice administrator not later than November 8, 2010. You must list your name, address, email address and the name of this case. If you do not exclude yourself from the Class, you will automatically be in the Class and be bound by the results of the lawsuit.
The description of the case is general and does not cover all of the issues and proceeding thus far. A copy of the Third Amended Complaint can be viewed online at www.ticketfeelitigation.com. The file in the case is a matter of public record and may be viewed by visiting the Court Clerk’s office at 111 N. Hill Street, Los Angeles, California.
INQUIRIES: Any questions concerning this notice should be directed to info@ticketfeelitigation.com, or by mail or phone: Notice Administrator / Ticket Fee Litigation / Strategic Claims Services, 600 N. Jackson Street, Suite 3 / Media, PA 19063 / 1-888-511-4623.
The Court has certified the following attorneys as lead counsel for the Class and Subclass: Robert J. Stein, III, Esq. and William M. Hensley, Esq. of Adorno Yoss Alvarado & Smith / 1 MacArthur Place / Suite 200 / Santa Ana, California 92707 and Steven P. Blonder, Esq. of Much Shelist Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein, P.C. / 191 North Wacker Drive / Suite 1800 / Chicago, Illinois 60606. Please do not contact the Court or Defendant’s attorneys.
[/quote]
[quote name="Suckitticketbastard"]
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CURT SCHLESINGER and PETER LO RE, )
on behalf themselves and the Certified Class, ) No. BC304565
Plaintiffs, )
v. )
TICKETMASTER, a Delaware Corporation, )
Defendant. )
NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION
TO: All persons who purchased tickets using ticketmaster.com during the period from October 21, 1999 through May 31, 2010 and were residents of the United States at the time of the purchase.
PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY.
THIS IS NOT A NOTICE OF A LAWSUIT AGAINST YOU
WHAT THIS LAWSUIT IS ABOUT: Plaintiffs filed this case on October 21, 2003. The case is proceeding as a class action on behalf of United States residents. The claims challenge Ticketmaster’s Order Processing Fee and the fee it charges customers who select the UPS Delivery option on Ticketmaster’s website, www.ticketmaster.com (the “Website”), for ticket purchases made by United States residents over the Website between October 21, 1999 and May 31, 2010.
The purpose of the notice is to advise you about the class action, including your rights in connection with the case. This notice is not intended to be an expression of any opinion by the Court as to the merit of the claims or defenses in this case.
The Order Processing Fee Claim. Plaintiffs assert that Ticketmaster’s Order Processing Fee is deceptive and leads consumers to believe that it represents Ticketmaster’s costs to process their orders, and that the Order Processing Fee is just a profit component for Ticketmaster, unrelated to the costs of processing the orders. Ticketmaster disputes these allegationsand disputes that the Order Processing Fee is deceptive.
The UPS Delivery Claim. This claim is brought only on behalf of the Class members who selected and paid for the UPS Delivery option. Plaintiffs allege that Ticketmaster’sUPS Delivery option is deceptive because it leads consumers to believe the price they are paying Ticketmaster is a pass-through of the fees that UPS charges to Ticketmaster and that Ticketmaster substantially marks-up the amount it actually pays to UPS. Ticketmaster disputes these allegationsand disputes that its UPS Delivery option is deceptive.
The Honorable Kenneth R. Freeman has ordered that these claims, made under California’s False Advertising Law and Unfair Competition Law may proceed as a class action consisting of: all United States residents who purchased tickets using the Website during the period from October 21, 1999 through May 31, 2010 (the “Class”). The Court also ordered that a subclass consisting of those class members who also paid the UPS Delivery Price, may proceed as a class action (the “Subclass”). By allowing the Class and the Subclass to proceed as a class action, the Court has not made any determination about the merits of either claim. All Class members will be bound by the outcome of the Court’s ultimate ruling on the Order Processing Fee claim (unless they timely opt out of this case, as described below). All Subclass members will be bound by the outcome of the Court’s ultimate ruling on the UPS Delivery claim (unless they timely opt out of this case, as described below).
If Plaintiffs prevail on their claims, they will ask the Court to award appropriate relief, including requiring Ticketmaster to repay to each Class member any money that Ticketmaster has made as a result of any conduct found to be illegal. Ticketmaster disputes that its conduct is illegal and also disputes that the Class members are entitled to any refunds.
The Court has set the case for non-jury trial beginning January 26, 2011.
The Court has ordered that this notice be emailed to the Class members and publicized. This notice explains the nature of the lawsuit and informs the Class members of their legal rights.
YOUR OPTIONS: If you are a member of the Class and wish to remain in the suit and participate in any potential recovery, you DO NOT need to do anything at this time. You will be represented by the attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Class, who have taken the case on a contingency basis, meaning they will be paid only if they obtain a recovery for the Class. Any fee eventually paid to Plaintiffs’ counsel must be approved by the Court, which may require the payment to be deducted from any recovery obtained in this case, or paid by Ticketmaster, or both.
You have the right to exclude yourself from the class action by filing a written request for exclusion with the Notice Administrator either electronically at www.ticketfeelitigation.com or by mail sent to: Ticket Fee Litigation, Strategic Claims Services, 600 N. Jackson Street, Suite 3, Media, PA 19063. The notice of exclusion must be either postmarked or received (if sent by means other than U.S. mail) by the notice administrator not later than November 8, 2010. You must list your name, address, email address and the name of this case. If you do not exclude yourself from the Class, you will automatically be in the Class and be bound by the results of the lawsuit.
The description of the case is general and does not cover all of the issues and proceeding thus far. A copy of the Third Amended Complaint can be viewed online at www.ticketfeelitigation.com. The file in the case is a matter of public record and may be viewed by visiting the Court Clerk’s office at 111 N. Hill Street, Los Angeles, California.
INQUIRIES: Any questions concerning this notice should be directed to info@ticketfeelitigation.com, or by mail or phone: Notice Administrator / Ticket Fee Litigation / Strategic Claims Services, 600 N. Jackson Street, Suite 3 / Media, PA 19063 / 1-888-511-4623.
The Court has certified the following attorneys as lead counsel for the Class and Subclass: Robert J. Stein, III, Esq. and William M. Hensley, Esq. of Adorno Yoss Alvarado & Smith / 1 MacArthur Place / Suite 200 / Santa Ana, California 92707 and Steven P. Blonder, Esq. of Much Shelist Denenberg Ament & Rubenstein, P.C. / 191 North Wacker Drive / Suite 1800 / Chicago, Illinois 60606. Please do not contact the Court or Defendant’s attorneys.
[/quote]
