Tiffany & Co. is suing Costco for selling engagement rings branded as “Tiffany” that have nothing to do with Tiffany & Co. If you or anyone you know has bought a Tiffany branded engagement ring at Costco, please contact our office immediately. You may have a claim, and PCVA would like to help you hold accountable those who may have mislead you. More info can be found at the Seattle Times.
February 15, 2013
April 9, 2012
A New York bankruptcy court has issued firm deadlines for people to file claims against the Christian Brothers. Sexual abuse survivors must file a claim by August 1, 2012. All other claims, including claims for physical abuse, must be filed by May 11, 2012. People who fail to file a claim by the appropriate deadline may be forever barred from suing the Christian Brothers.
You can read more about our nearly decade-long fight against the Christian Brothers, including some of the damaging evidence we have gathered over time. We have also created a separate website about the bankruptcy process, including the deadlines for filing a claim against the Christian Brothers.
December 2, 2011
Today, Judge Thomas McPhee awarded more than $95 million to our in-home care providers in the class action case of Rekhter v. State of Washington. In his ruling, Judge McPhee affirmed the original $57 million verdict from a Thurston County jury delivered back in February, and then added an additional $38 million in interest covering the 5-year timeframe when DSHS in-home care providers’ compensation was unlawfully cut by the State.
DSHS now has 30 days to appeal the final judgments (January 3). Based upon its prior actions, we anticipate DSHS will appeal straight to Washington’s Supreme Court. That process could take anywhere from a year and a half to two years or more. Washington’s Supreme Court tries to get opinions out within about 18 months from the date of an appeal (on average), but, in reality, they have as long as necessary to get their opinions out. Being a large case and public funds involved, the Justices could take their time with the appellate review. In the meantime, the judgment will collect 12% in interest, amount to roughly $30,000 per day on the total amount of the judgment. We will keep you posted as developments unfold.
We at PCVA are very proud to represent all of you. Your patience through this long and sometimes difficult process has been greatly appreciated. If you have any further problems with DSHS, the State of Washington or if you have any other legal matter where you feel your rights have been violated, please give us a call.
Seattle Times: Judge: DSHS owes $96 million to caregivers
October 17, 2011
Click here to see more information about what our firm is doing to help those affected by the Third Runway.
You may know that a class action lawsuit has been filed to recover real property value damages that the Port of Seattle’s Third Runway operations have caused. But over two years has passed since that lawsuit was first filed because the Port is still fighting to prevent the class action from going forward. As of today, the Court is not scheduled to rule on class certification until November 18, 2011.
Even if the Court certifies that class action, it is *only* for damage to the value of your real property (e.g., the Third Runway has reduced the value of your real property). The class action lawsuit will *not* cover other damages, like personal injury, annoyance, or damage to property other than real property.
July 26, 2011
Recently, on July 1, 2011, Judge McPhee ruled in our favor and awarded pre and post-judgment interest to the class. What does this mean? Our accountant expert has calculated prejudgment interest on the Jury’s verdict at over $30 million dollars (a preliminary estimate). This would be added to the Jury’s verdict. Therefore, we believe that the total judgment now likely exceeds $90 million. In addition, post-judgment interest at a rate of 12% per annum will be applied to the judgment on a going forward basis. This could be up to $900K per month in post-judgment interest (another preliminary estimate).
What happens next? Judge McPhee will prepare his Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law (“FFCL”) on the Beneficiary Class claim. Both sides have submitted their proposed FFCL to Judge McPhee for review.
We really appreciate your continued patience with the process. As complex and as important as this case is to everyone involved, the process moves very deliberately and probably frustratingly slow for many of you. Based upon the Court’s scheduling, it may take another six months before final judgment is entered. As judge McPhee indicated at an earlier hearing, he is taking a very careful and deliberate approach because the case involves the public’s money. Rest assured, however, that we are doing everything possible to try and push everything to final resolution as quickly as possible.
As always, if you have any questions, feel free to call or email me.
Darrell L. Cochran is a Tacoma attorney who specializes in Government Liability claims. Contact us today to discuss your potential case and schedule a free consultation.
April 25, 2011
Pfau Cochran Vertetis Amala case Ranked 35th of Top 100 Verdicts of 2010, Nationally by VerdictSearch.com
The verdict for class plaintiffs in Rekhter v DSHS was for $57,123,795 and ranked 35th of VerdictSearch’s Top 100 Verdicts of 2010. See the complete list below:
February 14, 2011
As many of you may have read in an earlier posting, the State asked us to discuss settlement with them on February 9th and 10th in a formal process in front of a retired judge called “mediation”. We agreed to mediate the case and participated in good faith but, after two solid days of talks, the parties could not reach an agreement. Our goal is to protect the verdict for all of you and balance the risk of potential appellate court review of the trial court decisions and, ultimately, we felt the State’s position discounted the verdict and trial court decisions too heavily.
The next step for us happens this Friday, February 18th, when we enter judgment against the State for the $57 million verdict. This starts the process for the State’s deadline to appeal and also starts the clock running on the interest on the verdict. We will provide an update after that hearing on Friday.
February 8, 2011
The Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) approached the class representative and class counsel several weeks ago and asked us to consider a settlement of the case before it files its appeal of the jury verdict and court decisions. W know that the class members have waited a long time for justice in this case. We want to make sure we get the best outcome for our clients. We want to explore any and all options to do so. We believe it is in the best interests of the class to explore whether the State has a reasonable offer at this time because the appeals process can take anywhere from a year and a half to three years before we learn whether the court system will allow us to recover the back wages owed in this case.
With that in mind, tomorrow and Thursday the lead attorneys and class representatives in the Rekhter v. DSHS class action lawsuit will be engaging with DSHS in a process known as mediation. Mediation is an attempt to come to a settlement agreement led by a neutral third-party, called the mediator. In mediation, both sides present proposals for a fair settlement. The mediator shuttles back and forth between the parties in order to bridge the gap between the alternate proposals. In this case, the mediator is a retired superior court judge. The process takes some time; this mediation is scheduled for two days. The mediator’s job is to bring the parties together. If a settlement is reached, the class will receive formal notice by mail and publication. However, if the parties fail to reach an agreement, the appeal process would continue as planned.
Please continue to visit our web site for additional updates with regard to this class action. We will post updates regarding any significant developments in the case.
January 28, 2011
Rekhter v. DSHS Class Action Lawsuit
Frequently Asked Questions
Q) What happened in the trial?
A) The case went to trial on November 29, 2010. It took 3 weeks to try the case, and on December 21, 2010, the jury came back with a $57,000,000 verdict for the class of 22,000 plaintiffs. The jury found that DSHS broke its contract with the care providers by failing to honor its duty of good faith and fair dealing.
Q) Does that mean the lawsuit is over and we are getting money soon?
A) No. The law allows the defendants to appeal the verdict, and the state has declared that it will appeal. It will likely take anywhere between 18-40 months for the case to be totally resolved, at which time the claims process will begin.
Q) Is there a chance now that the State will offer to settle the case sooner?
A) Yes. The judge has encouraged both sides to consider the risks of losing on appeal. The State has recently approached us about discussing a settlement of the case. We will keep you updated on when talks start.
Q) I was an in-home care provider between 2003 and 2008 and I believe I may be entitled to financial recovery. How can I make sure I will be considered?
A) Once the case is fully resolved, the court will order a claims process to begin. If you believe you are a class member, you will be asked to submit a form and some form of documentation to the court-ordered claims administrator. You should make sure you obtain provider numbers, client numbers, summary statements of hours and time cards if you have them. We can check the database of names to verify whether you are on it. This process has not yet begun, so right now, you don’t need to do anything. Check back regularly and keep an eye out and ear open for news about this case.
*** Remember if you, or your family or friends have been injured in car crashes, we are available to represent them, too. We invite you to review our website for cases we have handled. Contact us for more information.