Archive for legal settlement

Walmart Settles Class Action Lawsuit Over False Advertising of Weighted Products

Walmart Settles Class Action Lawsuit Over False Advertising of Weighted Products

Walmart has agreed to settle a class action lawsuit brought by consumers who accused the retail giant of falsely advertising the net weight of certain household and food items. The settlement, which includes a multi-million dollar payout and changes to product labeling practices, marks another major example of corporate accountability in the consumer goods sector.

The lawsuit alleged that Walmart sold products with labels that overstated the quantity or weight of the contents inside. Consumers reported that some packages contained as much as 15% less than what was promised. Affected items ranged from packaged produce to cleaning supplies and even protein powders.

Plaintiffs argued that Walmart violated state and federal consumer protection laws by misleading customers at the point of purchase. The complaint detailed instances where the shelf label and packaging both reflected inaccurate weights, leading to inflated prices per unit.

Attorneys representing the plaintiffs said the issue wasn’t isolated. “This was not a one-off mistake. It was a pattern of overstatement that cost consumers millions collectively,” one attorney explained. “People trust the information printed on packaging. When that information is wrong, it’s not just misleading—it’s unlawful.”

Walmart has denied any wrongdoing but agreed to a financial settlement of $6.5 million to resolve the claims. The money will be used to reimburse consumers who purchased the mislabeled products between 2018 and 2023. Eligible consumers will be able to file claims online and receive compensation based on proof of purchase or estimated quantities purchased.

In addition to the payout, Walmart has pledged to update its packaging and improve its internal auditing process. A spokesperson for the company said, “While we believe our labeling practices met industry standards, we are committed to transparency and accuracy for our customers. This settlement allows us to move forward without prolonged litigation.”

Legal analysts say the case highlights the importance of accurate labeling, especially in an economy where families closely monitor grocery and household spending. Even small discrepancies in weight can add up over time, particularly for budget-conscious consumers.

The lawsuit follows a growing trend of class actions targeting deceptive marketing and packaging claims. In recent years, companies across the food, beauty, and household product industries have faced lawsuits for misrepresenting ingredients, product volume, or functionality.

Consumer watchdog groups applauded the outcome, calling it a win for everyday shoppers. “This case reminds companies that they will be held accountable when they exaggerate claims on packaging. Consumers deserve honesty—especially from the largest retailers in the country,” said a spokesperson from a national consumer advocacy organization.

The settlement still requires final approval from a federal judge, but no objections are expected. If approved, Walmart will begin issuing reimbursements by the end of the year.

For now, consumers are being encouraged to review their past purchases and save receipts for any eligible products.

Fox News’ $787.5 Million Settlement with Dominion Voting Systems

Fox News’ $787.5 Million Settlement with Dominion Voting Systems

In one of the most consequential defamation settlements in U.S. media history, Fox News agreed to pay $787.5 million to Dominion Voting Systems to resolve a lawsuit alleging the network knowingly aired false claims that the company rigged the 2020 presidential election. The case, which was moments away from going to trial in Delaware Superior Court, brought renewed scrutiny to the boundaries of free speech, journalistic responsibility, and media accountability.

Dominion’s lawsuit accused Fox News of repeatedly promoting conspiracy theories involving the company’s voting machines after the 2020 election, despite internal messages and emails showing that many of the network’s top hosts and executives knew the claims were untrue. According to court documents, Fox personalities amplified the narratives to appease their audience and compete with rival outlets, fearing a loss in ratings and viewership following President Trump’s defeat.

Fox hosts and producers were shown in discovery to have expressed disbelief or skepticism about the claims being aired. Yet they continued to give airtime to guests and contributors spreading theories about Dominion’s role in supposed election fraud. The discrepancy between what was publicly reported and privately believed became a central piece of evidence that pushed Fox closer to settlement.

The $787.5 million payout represents one of the largest known defamation settlements involving a media company. Although Fox did not admit liability in the settlement, legal analysts say the sheer size of the payout signals the network’s concern about the potential damages a jury trial could have brought, particularly with a jury selected and opening statements hours away. The judge had already ruled that the claims about Dominion aired on Fox were false, leaving the jury to decide whether Fox acted with “actual malice.”

Dominion, which supplies voting machines to jurisdictions nationwide, claimed that Fox’s repeated airing of false allegations caused serious reputational damage, leading to threats against its employees, lost business opportunities, and erosion of public trust in the electoral system. While Dominion originally sought $1.6 billion in damages, the settlement still marks a resounding legal and symbolic victory for the company.

Fox News issued a brief statement following the agreement, stating: “We acknowledge the Court’s rulings finding certain claims about Dominion to be false. This settlement reflects Fox’s continued commitment to the highest journalistic standards.”

Legal experts note that this case may have long-term consequences for media outlets navigating political polarization, misinformation, and the First Amendment. While Fox avoided a public trial, the discovery process made public thousands of pages of emails, texts, and depositions revealing inner workings of the network during a period of national unrest.

The case also sends a message to other media entities: airing knowingly false claims, even in the name of audience engagement, can carry massive legal and financial consequences. Other voting technology firms, such as Smartmatic, have pending lawsuits that could follow a similar path.