Silver Golub & Teitell LLP represents individuals, businesses, institutional investors, family offices, high net worth individuals, and governmental entities in all types of class action litigation at the trial and appellate levels. SGT’s Class Action Group has experience litigating complex antitrust, consumer protection, data privacy, ERISA, environmental, RICO, insurance, and securities & digital asset matters, among others and has recovered billions of dollars in class action verdicts and settlements for clients.
The United States’ antitrust laws benefit consumers by ensuring a free and fair marketplace. United States’ antitrust laws such as the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 et seq., the Clayton Act, 15 U.S.C. § 12 et seq., and their state analogues (e.g., the Connecticut Antitrust Act, § 35-24 et seq.), promote free and fair competition in the marketplace by prohibiting activities such as price-fixing, bid rigging, wage suppression, and market monopolization, among others. SGT's attorneys have extensive experience litigating on behalf of plaintiffs harmed by anticompetitive behavior to enforce federal and state antitrust laws.
Currently, SGT represents lead plaintiff Zoe Borozny in a putative class action pending in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut against defendants Pratt & Whitney (a division of Raytheon Technologies Corp.) and several aerospace engineer staffing companies alleging that they conspired to restrict competition and suppress wages via “no-poach” agreements in violation of antitrust laws. The case is Borozny et al. v. v. Raytheon Technologies Corporation, Pratt & Whitney Division, et al, No.3:21-cv-01657 and is pending before Hon. Sarala V. Nagala in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut.
SGT also serves as part of a committee along with court-appointed interim co-lead counsel representing direct purchaser plaintiff drug wholesalers Rochester Drug Co-Operative, Inc. (“Rochester Co-op”) and Dakota Drug, Inc. (“Dakota Drug”) in a proposed class action alleging that brand-name and generic EpiPen manufacturers and a group of pharmacy benefit managers (“PBMs”) conspired to maintain supracompetitiveprices for brand-name and generic EpiPens. The case is In re EpiPen Direct Purchaser Litigation, No. 20-CV-00827 and is pending before Hon. Eric. C. Tostrud in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota.
Previously, SGT represented a Westport, Connecticut taxi service against the Westport Transit District, claiming that the district had intentionally engaged in monopolistic practices in violation the Connecticut Antitrust Act, § 35-24 et seq. The trial court found that defendants Westport Transit District had gained monopoly power and engaged in predatory pricing by setting its prices not only below cost but substantially below average variable costs, and that the defendant’s pricing was instituted to drive its competitors out of business. The Court awarded treble damages, including lost profits, business value, and prejudgment interest The case was Westport Taxi Service, Inc. v. Westport Transit District, No. CV 79 0041301S (Conn. Super. Ct. 1992)
SGT advises consumers, businesses, and governmental entities harmed by unfair and deceptive businesses practices against the world’s largest companies.
SGT has a proud history of representing consumers who have been harmed by large corporations. In 1996, SGT took up litigation against the American tobacco industry when few other firms in Connecticut would, and achieved outstanding results which were singled out by a panel of former attorneys general. SGT’s work resulted in the State of Connecticut receiving an additional $370 million on top of Connecticut’s $3.6 billion share of the national tobacco settlement.
SGT’s efforts continue today. We represent consumers victimized by defective products, contaminated goods, data breaches and collection, and other unfair and deceptive acts.
Companies collect, store, and use our data and personal information for their own benefit. When companies misuse or fail to protect our data and information, it threatens our privacy and financial wellbeing.
In the modern digital world companies routinely store and exploit our personal information and data, often for their own benefit, not ours. Unfortunately, companies often exploit the information in a way which violates our privacy or fail to adequately safeguard our sensitive information.
Fortunately, federal and state laws are increasingly recognizing that individuals’ personal identifying information (i.e., social security numbers, driver’s license numbers, names, address, and emails) and other data (i.e., bank account numbers, credit card numbers, digital wallet addresses, medical information, browsing data, device identifiers, etc.) are valuable assets which need protection.
SGT represents individuals whose sensitive personal information and data have been illegally collected, stored, misused, or stolen. We have been able to achieve precedent-setting results for our clients in important cases across the country.
Environmental contamination can have a profound impact on our health. SGT’s attorneys are at the forefront of litigating emerging environmental issues on behalf of New England communities.
SGT’s class action attorneys represent individuals whose health and property have been impacted by environmental contamination.
With increasing frequency, American communities are learning their water supplies and topsoil have been contaminated with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (“PFAS” or “forever chemicals”) or other carcinogens such as benzene. These contaminations can have a devastating impact on individuals’ lives, and it is essential that individuals are represented by counsel that knows how to respond.
SGT currently represents plaintiffs and a proposed class of over 300 residents of Westminster, Massachusetts whose drinking water and soil has been contaminated by toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) discharged from a composting site which dumped paper mill waste. SGT filed a class action on behalf of Westminster residents in August 2022 and has, since filing, monitored Defendants’ compliance with MassDEP directives regarding remediation efforts.
SGT represents consumers against insurers and financial services providers who violate the terms of their policies and agreements or otherwise engage in unlawful, unfair, or deceptive conduct.
Insurance companies leverage their expertise to sell consumers complex financial products on terms favorable to the insurance companies. Consumers have no negotiating power at the point of sale. Despite these often already-favorable terms, however, insurance companies frequently violate their own agreements, knowing that most individuals are unwilling to bear the disproportionately large financial burden of challenging the insurance company’s actions.
SGT is proud to have achieved significant results for individuals harmed by insurance and financial services companies.
SGT represents employees victimized by employer misconduct, including wage and hour law violations, illegal discrimination based on race, color, national origin, religion, age, gender, sexual orientation, or disability, and misuse of employees’ retirement benefits.
SGT has decades of experience litigating labor & employment class actions on behalf of employee plaintiffs. Our class action attorneys are well versed in federal and state wage and hour laws (including unpaid overtime, break time, or vacation time), federal and state civil rights and discrimination laws, ERISA, the WARN Act, and whistleblower laws such as the False Claims Act (and state analogues), among others. We have represented clients in a wide range of industries and have recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for our clients. We are proud of the impact the labor & employment cases we have litigated have had on our clients and the classes many of them represented.
SGT represents investors in stocks, bonds, digital assets and other alternative investments victimized by misconduct in violation of the federal and securities laws and state common law.
SGT has represented individuals, businesses, and institutional investors in actions who has lost money on investments due to illegal conduct that violated federal and state securities laws and state common law. In addition to more traditional actions seeking to recover money invested in hedge funds, stocks, and bonds, SGT is at the forefront of emerging legal issues surrounding digital assets without represented of the Plaintiffs and putative class in Underwood v. Coinbase, a class action alleging that the digital asset trading platform Coinbase is violating securities laws by allowing the trading of securities on its platform without registering as a securities exchange as required by law. SGT has also played a leading role recovering institutional and individual investors’ money in after they suffered losses as a result of the multi-billion dollars perpetrated by employees of Allianz Global Investors U.S. LLC’s Structured Products Groups.
- Aerosol Spray Benzene Contamination Litigation
- Aerospace No-Poach/Wage-Fixing Litigation
- AllianzGI Structured Alpha Mutual Fund Class Action Litigation
- Apple Siri Biometric Voiceprint Litigation – Zaluda v. Apple, Inc.
- Baby Food Heavy Metals Litigation
- Coinbase Unregistered Securities Exchange Litigation
- Diaz v. Griffin Hospital Litigation
- Digital Currency Group & Genesis Global Capital Litigation
- EpiPen Direct Purchaser Litigation
- Google & YouTube Child Tracking Litigation
- Nelnet Data Breach Litigation
- State Employees Bargaining Coalition V. Rowland
- Westminster, Mass. PFAS Contamination
- AllianzGI Structured Alpha Hedge Fund Class Action
- Anglim v. Xerox Corporation
- Clearview Facial Recognition Litigation
- Spencer v. The Hartford Financial Services Group
- Town of New Hartford, et al v. Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority
- United States ex rel. Keeth v. United Technologies Corporation
- Westport Taxi Service, Inc. v. Westport Transit
SGT's class action clients do not pay for services or litigation expenses out-of-pocket. SGT covers all costs and fees associated with the class action litigation and operates on a contingency basis. That is, SGT is only compensated (if at all) after a successful outcome for our clients. In the event of a class-wide settlement or verdict at trial, we apply to the court to be paid a fee out of the recovery. These fees as well as any costs we seek reimbursement for must be approved by a judge.
A class action a type of litigation where a single or small group of individuals represent a larger group (the "class") harmed by the same conduct and/or seeking a similar form of relief in a single proceeding. Proceeding in this way is appropriate where the alleged group harmed, or "putative class" is made up of "similarly situated" individuals. This means that they have suffered similar injuries as a result of the same type of conduct. Class action lawsuits are often used when it would be impractical or impossible for individual plaintiffs to bring their claims individually.
Silver Golub & Teitell LLP often represents similarly situated individuals or investors in cases involving consumer fraud, securities fraud, defective products, data privacy, and environmental contamination. In these cases, the class action provides a mechanism for bringing together a large number of similarly situated individuals in order to hold the wrongdoer accountable and obtain relief for the class as a whole.
In a class action lawsuit, the lead or representative plaintiff is an individual who is chosen to represent the interests of all class members. Selection of a lead plaintiff is usually based on a number of factors, including the strength of their claim and their willingness to be actively involved in the litigation. The lead plaintiff is generally not afforded any special legal status but their role is essential to the success of the class action.
To qualify as a lead or representative plaintiff an individual or investor must generally meet the following criteria: (1) the plaintiff has suffered some injury as a result of the defendant's actions that is typical of the injury suffered by other class members; (2) the plaintiff must be able to represent the interests of the class fairly and adequately; and (3) the plaintiff must not have any interests that are antagonistic to those of the class.
In the case of a securities fraud or investment-related class action, this typically means that an investor must have invested in and held the investment through a certain time period. In a consumer case, it typically means an individual must have purchased or used the product or service at issue during the relevant period.
This is a question only you can answer. People choose to serve as lead plaintiffs for a variety of reasons. Most often, it is because people care about what has happened to them and recognize that if they don't act, there is no guarantee someone else will.
Most successful class actions end in settlement, rather than a verdict at trial. When a settlement is reached (or a verdict decided), all class members are entitled to a proportionate share of the recovery. Often, differences in the amount of recovery between class members will depend on the type of securities, bonds, goods, and/or services an investor or consumer purchased. Most of the time, a claims administrator is hired (and overseen by SGT) to administer the process of getting class members their share of a recovery.
Settlements often provide relief to class members regardless of whether they still have a proof of purchase. In the case of securities actions, selling your shares after the class period ends does not affect your status as a class member. Situations vary, it is worth it to speak to us about your individual circumstances.