Class action lawsuit filed against Apple
Class Action News
The law offices of Peter Polischuk and Robert Dreher have filed suit on behalf of a class of plaintiffs alleging that Apple made "false claims" about the superior display capabilities of the MacBook and MacBook Pro. Class participants purport that the following marketing claims were made by Apple: "a nuanced view simply unavailable on other portables; "TFT display with support for millions of colors;" Aperture as "the ultimate photographer's workstation" Those claims are, at least in part, constituent of deception and misrepresentation, according to the plaintiffs, who claim that instead of adhering to the aforementioned degree of refinement, MacBook and MacBook Pro displays have been prone to flaws like "grainy" or "sparkly" quality, banding in gradients, and distracting lines of distortion.
The lawsuit even directly references a MacNN forum thread in which users note a distinct "grainy" quality of the MacBook Pro display that is extant regardless of booted operating system (Windows XP or Mac OS X) and non-extant on externally connected displays. The platform independence of this issue, as noted in the thread, is directly referenced as a key proponent of the lawsuit's claim.
Posters to that thread also identified a small LCD test application that dramatically exhibits the "sparkle" effect when run on afflicted systems. Another poster to the thread took several pictures of the "grainy" effect.
To showcase the defects, the lawsuit claims that Apple's mechanisms for dealing with users experiencing these issues was less than cordial, with class litigants complaining of Apple employees denying requests for exchange or refund on the basis that machines were "within spec" or that users were "imagining" the problems. In addition, the lawsuit claims that Apple routinely corralled discussion of the problems on its own message boards, deleting grievances voiced by users.
Related listings
-
Class-action lawsuit filed in pet food recall
Class Action News 05/16/2007[##_1L|1375161124.jpg|width="130" height="130" alt=""|_##]The pet-food recall that included more than 100 types and resulted in the death of more than a dozen cats or dogs has spawned the first class-action lawsuit against manufacturers, including Ci...
-
WellPoint unit settles class-action suit in California
Class Action News 05/15/2007Indianapolis-based WellPoint Inc.’s subsidiary in California—facing a state fine for retroactively canceling health insurance policies—agreed Friday to a class-action settlement with 6,000 policyholders, according to USA Today.Blue Cross of Californi...
-
Class Action vs. Cutera, Inc. Handled by Schiffrin
Class Action News 05/08/2007Notice is hereby given that a class action lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on behalf of all common stock purchasers of Cutera, Inc. (NASDAQ: CUTR) ("Cutera" or the "Company") from January ...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.