Class Action

Ponzi Schemes

Latest News


Class Actions

Class Actions

A class action suit provides opportunity for many less powerful individuals to band together and address a legal issue. In many instances, this includes receiving justice from large corporations which sell faulty products. This is a key area of concentration at Starr Austen & Miller LLP.

Although each situation is unique, class actions cases usually have some similar elements.


A victim discovers a problem such as with a product that is unsafe or fails to perform as promised by the manufacturer. The victim cannot effectively solve the problem on his or her own. For example, we successfully won a class action settlement against an appliance manufacturer who built water heaters with bad thermocouples — a $50 part.


Our class actions clients feel the company should correct the product for their benefit and everyone else’s as well. Usually clients care more about justice than receiving compensation.


Often the problem goes unaddressed even though it affects many people. This is because the item or problem in question has a relatively small dollar value, so victims find it uneconomical to seek relief on their own. But class actions litigation makes it economically viable to obtain representation.


If you are experiencing a loss due to a faulty product, we’re here to help.

What is a Class Action Lawsuit?

by Scott Starr, Partner

Class Action and Mass Action Lawsuit

by Scott Starr, Partner

Many people suffer the same harm, and when people suffer the same harm, they may have the same right to a remedy.

Class Action Case History

Schweinfurth vs. Motorola

Originally filed in 2005, the nationwide class action lawsuit claimed that the Defendant designed, manufactured, distributed and supplied cellular phones with defective charging ports.

Dale Burns, Gary Halpin and Key Hutchins v. Prudential Securities, Inc. and Jeffrey Pickett

Starr Austen & Miller was lead Plaintiffs’ counsel in a class action filed on behalf of approximately 300 Ohio residents who had their brokerage accounts improperly liquidated without authority by Defendants. This case tried to a Marion, Ohio jury, taking over a month to try.

Rosemary Tam and Wayne Tam, et al. v. David M. Housworth and Edward D. Jones & Company

In this case Starr Austen & Miller represented a group of approximately 100 people in a mass action against St. Louis based Edward D. Jones & Company regarding misrepresentations made by the Defendants in a sale of Petro Lewis Oil & Gas limited partnerships. The case was in litigation in Indiana State Court for a protracted period.

Amy Faught v. Whirlpool

This lawsuit charged Whirlpool Corp. and Lowe’s Home Center’s Inc. with manufacturing and selling defective residential water heaters that included thermocouples that failed at an unacceptable rate.  Every time the thermocouple failed, Class Members and their families were left with cold showers, piles of laundry and stacks of dishes.  This case was ultimately joined with Dawn Bowen v. Whirlpool Corporation, Lowe’s Companies, Inc., Lowe’s HIW, Inc., and American Water Heater Company in the United States District Court for the Central District of California for the class action settlement.

Please note that results of past cases cannot guarantee future success. To our present and future clients, we commit our best efforts. However, because each case involves many different factors, results will always be different from case-to-case. Cases that may seem similar to the cases listed here are not guaranteed to have the same or similar result. Each case is dependent upon its own set of facts and the only common factor in all the cases summarized here and throughout our website is that Starr Austen & Miller, LLP represented the client.

Our lawyers are available to review your situation.