TAMPA, Fla. (Legal Newsline) – A class action brought against Walmart in a Florida federal court which alleged products sold by the retail giant are weighted and priced improperly looks to be settled for $45 million.
Vassilios Kukorinis (individually and on behalf of all others similarly-situated) of Tampa, Fla. first filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida on Oct. 19, 2022 versus Walmart, Inc., of Bentonville, Ark.
Kukorinis’ lawsuit alleged customers are being misled by price stickers in four ways: That Walmart falsely inflates product weight, mislabels the weight of bagged produce, overcharges on sold-by-weight clearance products and overcharges on sold-by-weight seafood products.
The suit took aim at Walmart’s claim that “a cornerstone of our business” is “our commitment to price leadership.”
“The reality, however, is that Walmart uses unfair and deceptive business practices to deceivingly, misleadingly, and unjustly pilfer, to Walmart’s financial benefit, its customers’ hard-earned grocery dollars,” the suit said.
Walmart’s software is programmed to falsify weights, the suit added.
“When Walmart employees have been confronted with evidence of the overcharges alleged herein, they (a) could not explain how weight falsification and unit pricing manipulation had occurred; (b) could not correct the weight and/or price information at check-out or were required to attempt to ‘override’ the point of sale (often unsuccessfully); (c) acknowledged instances of prior improper pricing; and (d) expressed fear in losing their job if they acknowledged the wrongful pricing conduct,” the suit said.
UPDATE
On Nov. 16, counsel for Kukorinis filed an unopposed motion for preliminary approval of the class action settlement, in a total amount of $45 million.
“The proposed settlement creates a cash, non-reversionary common fund of $45 million for the benefit of the settlement class members. The settlement is an excellent outcome of this action for the class. It achieves an estimated recovery of more than 11% of the estimated aggregate overcharges alleged in the action for in-store purchases at Walmart stores of weighted goods and bagged citrus. The settlement provides settlement class members with the ability to receive cash payments of up to $25 without proof of purchase or up to $500 with documentation of their purchases of weighted goods and bagged citrus,” the motion stated, in part.
“The settlement was reached after over six months of intense negotiation by the parties, multiple mediation sessions conducted by the experienced and highly respected mediator Robert A. Meyer, Esq., briefing on two rounds of motions to dismiss, and the production by Walmart and analysis by plaintiff and his expert of substantial data and information.”
Plaintiff counsel explained that direct email notice will be sent to Walmart customers who are likely to have purchased weighted goods and bagged citrus, in order to inform class members of the settlement proceedings.
“Although a Court order setting dates for the final approval hearing, notice and settlement-related deadlines needs to await Walmart’s completion of the email collection (which is well underway), the Court may otherwise address plaintiff’s motion in the interim due to the volume of the data being queried, it is a time-consuming process and Walmart expects to identify the emails, along with a count of the number of emails, within the next four to six weeks,” the motion said.
“At that time, plaintiff will provide the Court with: (1) The number of emails for direct notice (which Walmart currently expects to be tens of millions); (2) The start and end dates for notice (which dates are dependent on receipt of and the volume of emails); and (3) If the Court has already entered an order preliminarily approving the proposed settlement, a form of proposed scheduling order (or, if the Court has not yet ruled on plaintiff’s motion, an updated form of preliminary approval order) identifying the proposed settlement-related deadlines and timing for the final approval hearing (which are dependent upon the end date for dissemination of the notice to settlement class members).”
Kukorinis’ counsel respectfully requests that the Court: (1) Preliminarily approve the proposed settlement; (2) Certify the proposed settlement class for settlement purposes only; (3) Appoint class counsel and plaintiff to represent the settlement class; (4) Appoint Angeion Group as the claims administrator; (5) Approve the notice plan; (6) Establish procedures for settlement class members to opt out or to object; and, upon plaintiff’s supplemental submission discussed in Section VII, (7) Set settlement-related deadlines and schedule the final approval hearing.
The plaintiff is represented by Nicholas E. Chimicles, Zachary P. Beatty and Kimberly Donaldson-Smith of Chimicles Schwartz Kriner & Donaldson-Smith, in Haverford.
The defendant is represented by Christopher Torres, Raymond D. Jackson, Naomi G. Beer and Robert J. Herrington of Greenberg Traurig, in Tampa, Fla., Denver, Colo. and Los Angeles, Calif.
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, Tampa Division case 8:22-cv-02402
From Legal Newsline: Reach Courts Reporter Nicholas Malfitano at nick.malfitano@therecordinc.com