United States Supreme Court Rules That Payphone Owners Have A Federal Private Right Of Action
In a case handled by partner David J. Russell, the United States Supreme Court recently confirmed that a payphone owner (such as Mr. Russell’s client) can sue in federal court for a long distance carrier’s failure to pay for toll free calls made from the plaintiff’s payphones. In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court ruled that payphone owners can bring suit in federal court against the responsible carrier under Sections 201(b) and 207 of the Telecommunications Act. This decision resolved a direct conflict between the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (which had held that there was such a cause of action) and the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (which had held, in another case, that there was no such cause of action). Mr. Russell briefed and argued the case to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and attended the October 2006 hearing before the United States Supreme Court.

The issue before the Supreme Court was whether a payphone owner could sue a long distance carrier in federal court and, if not, whether a payphone owner’s sole remedy was to either sue in state court or ask the FCC to investigate and fine the carrier for its failure to pay. The Supreme Court agreed with Mr. Russell’s argument that there is a federal private right of action—under Sections 201(b) and 207 (of Title 47 of the United States Code)—for an alleged failure to pay for toll free calls made from a payphone. The Supreme Court’s opinion can be found at:  http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&navby=case&vol=000&invol=05-705

LAW Fund Award of $228,000
The Legal Aid for Washington Fund (LAW Fund) recently received almost $228,000 from a class action lawsuit brought by Keller Rohrback L.L.P. According to LAW Fund President Bill Kinsel, this is the largest donation in the organization's history. Plaintiffs alleged that Spokane-based Ticket Track, Inc. violated the Washington State Consumer Protection Act and other laws by collecting violation fees in addition to parking lot fees owed. Ticket Track's precarious financial circumstances meant that the only available asset was an insuance policy. Rather than distributing the limited monetary recovery from this lawsuit to the thousands of consumers harmed by Ticket Track, the federal court approved the payment to the LAW Fund under the cy pres doctrine. The cost of printing and mailing checks to members of the class would have resulted in only nominal disbursements. The donation was particularly appropriate because the 30 legal-aid programs that the LAW Fund supports statewide take on consumer protection issues. The September 11, 2004 edition of The Seattle Times reported on this class action award. http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=lawfund11m&date=20040911

Jack-in-the-Box Medical Trust
Keller Rohrback L.L.P. served as Co-Lead Counsel in the class action litigation brought in Washington Superior Court against Jack-in-the-Box. Both class action and direct action cases were filed on behalf of persons claiming injury as a result of the consumption of food products sold by Jack-in-the-Box Restaurants which contained the E coli 0157:H7 bacteria in five western states. Damage claims included individuals with hemolytic uremic syndrome. The Class successfully negotiated a Medical Monitoring and Treatment Trust for the benefit of the Class. In addition to the benefits of this Trust, total settlements achieved through this litigation amounted to over $13 million.

In 2004, the Trust expired and over $692,000 was donated to the Children's Hospital Foundation for E coli Research. The endowment was a result of the litigation.

http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?slug=dige14m&date=20040914