| A | B | C | D | E | F | G | H | I | J | K | L | M | N | O | P | Q | R | S | T | U | V | W | X | Y | Z | AA | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 |  | Created by the National Consumer Law Center with support from Arnold Ventures Last Updated: Sept. 14, 2020 Something missing? Email anelson@nclc.org with tips. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2 | Bail & Corrections Industry Abuses Litigation Tracker | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
4 | CASE NAME | CASE NO. & COURT | YEAR FILED | STATUS | SUMMARY | SIGNIFICANT RULINGS | OVERVIEW OF CONSUMER ABUSES | CLAIMS (INCLUDING CONSTITUTIONAL CLAIMS AND DISMISSED CLAIMS; MAY NOT BE EXHAUSTIVE DUE TO SUBSEQUENTLY FILED COMPLAINTS) | MAJOR OBSTACLES RAISED (E.G., MCCARRAN-FERGUSON ACT) | DEFENDANT NAME + TYPE (I.E., INDIVIDUAL, SURETY, ETC.) | PLAINTIFF LAWYER | OTHER NOTES | ||||||||||||||||
5 | In re California Bail Bond Antitrust Litigation | No. 3:19-cv-000717 (N.D. Cal.) | Cases consolidated 2019 | Ongoing | Putative class action against California bail bond industry actors alleging that defendants conspired to articifically inflate price of bail bonds. | 2020 WL 3041316 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 13, 2020) (granting motion to dismiss some claims, granting Plaintiff leave to file amended complaint) | Conspiracy by sureties, bail agencies, bail industry associations, and two individuals to keep default premium rates fixed at 10%, advertise them as legal minimums, and prevent discounting or rebating as much as possible | • Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1 • Cartwright Act, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 16720 • California Unfair Competition Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq. | McCarran-Ferguson Act, state-action doctrine, filed-rate doctrine | All-Pro Bail Bonds (bail bond company); Bankers Insurance Company (underwriters of bail bond); Two Jinn, Inc. (bail bond company); Seaview Insurance Company (underwriters of bail bond); 24 additional actors in bail bond industry in California | Ari Nathan Cherniak, Julian Ari Hammond. Hammond Law, P.C.; Adam Gitlin, Benjamin D. Elga, Dean Michael Harvey, Daniel M. Hutchinson, Jalle H. Dafa, Katherine Collinge Lubin, Yama Salahi, Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP; Brian Highsmith, Stuart Rossman, National Consumer Law Center; Brian James Shearer, Justice Catalyst Law; Cindy Panuco, Nisha Kashyap, Stephanie Dominique Carroll. Public Counsel; David Hollis Seligman, Towards Justice | One of the original cases was Crain v. Accredited, No. 4:19-cv-02165 (N.D. Cal.) | ||||||||||||||||
6 | Morgan v. Blair's Bail Bonds, L.L.C. | No. 2019-08430 (State of Louisiana, Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans) | 2019 | Ongoing | Blair's Bail Bonds and Bankers Insurance company overcharged thousands of families who purchased bail bonds between 2005 and 2019. Following an insurance complaint, the Commissioner of Insurance issued a directive ordering the companies to comply with a statute limiting the premium that may be charged for a bail bond and to return money that families overpaid. The companies challenged the directive in frong of the Division of Administrative law and lobbied the state legislature to pass a bill insulating them from the oblibation to return the illegal proceeds. Plaintiffs filed a lawsuit seeking a declaration that the state law violates the Louisiana and Federal Constitutions. | Bail bond industry in New Orleans was overcharging 50,000 families $6 million over 14 years; state passed legislation clearing bail bond industry from having to repay families | • Prohibited local law, La. Const. art III § 12 • Prohibited special law, La. Const. art III § 12 • Due process under the Fourteenth Amendment and due process clause of the Louisiana Constitution | Blair's Bail Bonds, Inc.; Bankers Insurance Company, Inc. | William P. Quigley, Loyola University New Orleans, New Orleans, LA; Micah West, Anjana Joshi, Southern Poverty Law Center, Mongomery, AL & New Orleans, LA | Insurance Directive ordering refund to families; 2019 La. Acts 54 | ||||||||||||||||||
7 | Mitchell v. First Call Bail & Sur. | No. 9:19-cv-00067 (D. Mont.) | 2019 | Notice of settlement as to certain defendants filed 8/2020; undergoing final settlement agreements as of 9/2020 | Plaintiff arrested for driving with a suspended license and without proof of insurance. To pay bail Plaintiff's wife entered into bail bond agreement with local bond agency. The contract included right to use physical force to apprehend and arrest Plaintiff if he didn't appear in court. Bond agency hired a paramilitary group, which subsequently arrested Plaintiff at gun point. | 412 F. Supp. 3d 1208 (D. Mont. Oct. 9 2019) (granting in part and denying in part Defendants' motion to dismiss); 425 F. Supp. 3d 1256 (D. Mont. Dec. 2, 2019) (granting in part and denying in part Plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment) | Unfair transaction and no meaningful consent to contract (no adequate opportunity to review contract terms, no bargaining power, degree of force used in execution); deceptive industry practices; patterns of racketeering activities; extortion | • RICO claims based on kidnapping, extortion, extortionate extension of credit, extortionate collection of extention of credit, and financing extortionate credit transactions, 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) • Montana Consumer Protection Act, Mont. Code Ann. § 30-14-103 • Trespass • False imprisonment • Assault • Intentional infliction of emotional distress • Negligent infliction of emotional distress • Strict liability • Negligence | McCarran-Ferguson Act | First Call Bail and Surety (local bond agency, surety); Allegheny Casualty Company (surety); International Fidelity Insurance Company (surety); Montana Civil Assistance Group (paramilitary group); Michael Ratzburg (individual); Van Ness Baker (individual); Jason Haack (individual) | Alexander H. Rate, Elizabeth K. Ehret, ACLU of Montana, Missoula, MT; Andrea R. Woods, ACLU, New York, NY; Toby J. Marshall, Beth E. Terrell, Blythe H. Chandler, Terrell Marshall Law Group, PLLC, Seattle, WA | |||||||||||||||||
8 | Williams v. Dart | No. 1:18-cv-01456 (N.D. Ill.) | 2018 | Ongoing; remanded to district court July 2020 | Putative class action alleging constitutional and state law claims on behalf of arrestees whose bail orders were disregarded by the Cook County Sheriff. | 967 F.3d 625, 635 (7th Cir. 2020) (reversing and remanding trial court's dismissal on the pleadings; holding that "Plaintiffs' allegations are sufficient to procreed on federal constitutional claims for wrongful pretrial detention and denial of equal protection, and on state-law claims for contempt of court") | Bail orders changed unilaterally by Sheriff; no notice/explanation given to persons detained or their families | • Unlawful detention under Fourth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 • Equal protection and due process under the Fourteenth Amendment and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 • Illinois Civil Rights Act of 2003, 740 ILCS 23/5 • 55 ILCS 5/3-6019–6020 | Cook County Sheriff Thomas J. Dart | Thedford Garber Law, Chicago, Illinois | ||||||||||||||||||
9 | Galicia v. Recovery Management Solutions | No. 3:17-cv-11851 (D.N.J) | 2017 | Ongoing | Putative class action alleging violations of Fair Debt Collection Practices Act against defendant for alleged debt collection efforts (obligation incurred to AA Bail Bonds and later sold to Defendant). | 2018 WL 3730863 (D.N.J. Aug. 6, 2018) (granting motion to dismiss and plaintiff's request for leave to amend the complaint), judgment set aside, 2019 WL 1923052 (D.N.J. Apr. 29, 2019) | False representation that legal outsouring department was handling Plaintiff's account (in writing and in phone calls); failure to identify as debt collector on phone calls; calls made within Plaintiff's validation period overshadowing Plaintiff's validation rights; threatening litigation and wage garnishment when neither were imminent | • Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692e, 1692c ,1692d, 1692f, 1692g | Recovery Management Solutions, LLC (debt collection agency) | Yitzchak Zelman, Ari Hillel Marcus, Marcus Zelman, LLC, Ashbury Park, NJ | ||||||||||||||||||
10 | Egana v. Blair’s Bail Bonds Inc. | No. 2:17-CV-05899 (E.D. La.) | 2017 | Settled 2020 | Plaintiffs and friends and family signed contract and payment agreement with bail bond companies. As condition of loan, Defendants required Plaintiff Egana to wear ankle monitor for which he was charged $10/day. Egana told originally he would have the ankle monitor removed after paying $3,000, but then later told that the insurance company changed its mind. Plaintiffs allege Defendants threatened, harassed, and kidnapped (bounty hunters) them to extort payments and harassed family members. | 2018 WL 2463210 (E.D. La. June 1, 2018) (dismissing all claims except state contract law and state law false imprisonment claims) | Bond agreement failed to disclose key terms of the law; bond agreement charged above the limit allowed by state law on bail bond premiums; bounty hunters kidnapped Plaintiff, threatened Plaintiff's mother saying that they would bring him to jail if she didn't immediately make payments. Plaintiffs paid more than $6,000 to Defendants and were still surrendered to the court | • Truth in Lending Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq. • RICO claims based on collection of unlawful debt and kidnapping, extortion, and extortionate collection of extension of credit,18 U.S.C. § 1962(c), (d) • Louisiana Racketeering Act, La. Stat. Ann. §§ 15:1351 et seq. • False imprisonment • Conversion • Louisiana state contract law, La. Civ. Code Ann. Art 7; La. Civ. Code Ann. Art. 1968; La. Stat. Ann. § 22:1452; La. Civ. Code. Ann. Art. 2033 • Louisiana consumer credit law - usury | McCarran-Ferguson Act | Blair's Bail Bonds, New Orleans Bail Bonds, Bankers Insurance Company, Bankers Surety Services, and Bankers Underwriters (Bankers defendants acted as surety), A2i LLC, Alternative to Incarceration, Inc., and Alternation to Incarceration NOLA, Inc. | Ivy Wang, Southern Poverty Law Center, New Orleans, LA; Caren Elaine Short, Samuel J. Brooke, Sara Zampierin, Southern Poverty Law Center, Montgomery, AL; Charles Marshall Delbaum, National Consumer Law Center, Inc., Boston, MA; Ilya Feldsherov, Kevin J. Holt, Noah Levine, Ryanne E. Perio, William Roth, Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, New York, NY | |||||||||||||||||
11 | Miner v. Gov't Payment Svc., Inc. | No. 1:14-cv-07474 (N.D. Ill.) | 2014 | Joint stipulation of dismissal granted 2018 | Putative class action against Defendant for unlawfully providing bail bond services through charging merchant fees in processing services. | 2015 WL 3528243 (N.D. Ill. June 4, 2015) (dismissing some claims, granting extension for class discovery); 2017 WL 3909508 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 5, 2017) (ordering case conference for discovery disputes, striking motion for class certification) | Charging 8% fee on bail deposits, failing to return fees after court ordered refund of full amount paid | • Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act claims, 815 ILCS 505/1 et seq. - unfair business practice, deceptive business practice • Unjust enrichment • Fraud • Conversion | Government Payment Service, Inc. (payment processor for government services) | Larry D. Drury, William M Sweetnam, Sweetnam, Chicago IL; Phil Schlichting, Chicago, IL | ||||||||||||||||||
12 | Wilson v. Turner | No. 1:13-cv-03497 (D. Md.) | 2013 | Dismissed, final judgment in favor of plaintiff 2016 | Bail bondsman issued bail bond to Plaintiff on behalf of his father. When his bail was revoked, the father believed no further payment was required. Bail bondsman hired debt collectors, who used aggressive collection practices, to collect what was owed. | 2014 WL 4426126 (D. Md. Sept. 2, 2014) (denying plaintiff's request for default judgment); 2016 WL 825694 (D. Md. Mar. 3, 2016) (magistrate judge recommending the court grant final judgment in favor of the plaintiff, as well as actual and statutory damages) | Improper communications in connection with debt collection (for example, communication to third party without authorization); harrassment and verbal abuse of plaintiffs during debt collection communication; false and/or misleading representations to plaintiffs regarding the debt | • Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692e, 1692c, 1692b 1692d, 1692e, 1692f, 1692g • Maryland Consumer Debt Collection Act, Md. Code Ann., Com. Law Art. § 14-201 et seq. • Maryland Consumer Protection Act, CL § 13-301 | Michael Turner; Crawford Johnson's Bail Bonds | Jane Santoni, Williams and Santoni LLP, Towson, MD | ||||||||||||||||||
13 | Ramos v. Int'l Fidelity Ins. Co. | No. 13–P–1305 (Mass. App. Ct.) | 2013 | Review denied by MA Supreme Judicial Court 2015 | Seven plaintiffs (consolidated suits) sued to recover cash collateral and bail bond insurance premiums. The bond agent who issued bail bonds on the defendant's behalf and charged a premium of 10% had died, and had not put any of the collateral in escrow and left an insolvent estate. | 34 N.E.3d 737 (Mass App. Ct. 2015) (holding insurer vicariously liable for agent‘s actions in overcharging premiums); 473 Mass. 1103 (Mass. Oct. 2, 2015) (denying review) | Exhorbitant or excessive bail bond fee and difficulty recovering amounts owed because payments not put into escrow | • Rule 16 of the Superior Court Rules Governing Professional Bondsmen • M.G.L. c. 93A • Breach of contract | International Fidelity Insurance Company (surety, successor to Atlas Bonding Agency) | Peter A. Slepchuk, Springfield, MA | ||||||||||||||||||
14 | Gonzales & Gonzales Bonds & Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Action Immigration Bonds & Ins. Svcs., Inc. | No. 2:13-cv-06997 (C.D. Cal.) | 2013 | Stipulation of dismissal granted 2014 | California insurance agent involved in immigrantion bond transactions in several states sued Florida corporations that conduct immigration bond transactions on behalf of Florida surety company. Plaintiff alleges Defendants engage in unlicensed and deceptive business activities that caused financial and reputational injury to Plaintiff. | 2014 WL 12600146 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 24, 2014) (denying motion to dismiss, granting motion to strike plaintiff's request for damages and attorney's fees); 2014 WL 10100368 (C.D. Cal. Nov. 25, 2014) (Verdict, Agreement and Settlement) | Writing and selling immigration bonds without legal authorization and deceptive solicitation practices | • False representation, Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) • Unfair competition, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq. • Unfair competition, Florida Deceptive & Unfair Trade Practices Act, Florida Statute § 501.201 et seq. • Unfair competition, New York General Bus. Law §§ 349–50 • Unfair competition, New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, New Jersey Statute § 56:8–1 et seq. • Unfair competition, New Jersey common law, • Unfair competition, Tennesee Consumer Protection Act, Tennessee Code § 47-18-101 et seq. • Unfair competition, Tennesee common law, • Unfair competition, Georgia Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act, Georgia Code § 10:1-370 et seq. • Unfair competition, Georgia common law • Texas Deceptive Trade Practies-Consumer Protection Act, Texas Bus. and Commerce Code § 17.41 et seq. • Unfair competition, Texas common law • Breach of contract | McCarran-Ferguson Act | Action Immigration Bonds and Insurance Services (insurance co.), Action International Insurance (insurance co.), Bankers Insurance Company (FL surety company) | David R Ginsburg, Gary A. Nye, Roxborough Pomerance Nye and Adreani LLP, Woodland Hills, CA | |||||||||||||||||
15 | London v. Gums | No. 4:12-cv-03011 (S.D. Tex.) | 2012 | Final judgment & permanent injunction entered after non-jury trial 2014 | Plaintiff's husband was arrested and could not afford $20,000 bail. Plaintiff got two bonds from Set 'Em Free Bail Bonds (with service fee of 10%). Plaintiff believed all payments had been made by the time her husband was sentenced, and didn't continue paying. Bail bond company used aggressive collection practices to pursue remaining debt. | 2014 WL 546914 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 10, 2014) (entering final judgment against all defendants, permanent injunction against Set 'Em Free bail bonds, and awarding statutory damages to Plaintiff) | Communicating with third party about debt without Plaintiff's consent; threatening arrest; debt collectors represented themselves as investigation firm; failure to send written validation notice of debt | • Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692c, 1692b, 1692e, 1692g • Texas Debt Collection Practices Ac, Tex. Fin. Code § 392 • Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, Tex. Bus. & Comm. Code § 17.50 • Negligent hiring/supervision • Intentional infliction of emotional distress • Invasion of privacy by intrusion | Roshell Gums (individual) (aka Roschell D War, Roschell Reavely) (d/b/a Thomas Dixon, Association Investigations, TDA Investigations, Thomas Dixon & Associates); Antonio Thomas (individual); Frank Gibbs Jr (individual); Frederic Thomas (individual); Anthony Kennedy (individual); Sharon Davis (individual) (d/b/a Set 'Em Free Bail Bonds); Set 'Em Free Bail Bonds, Inc. (bail bond company) | Matthew Brian Probus, Wauson Probus, Sugar Land, TX | ||||||||||||||||||
16 | Two Jinn, Inc. v. Gov't Payment Svc., Inc. | No. SCV-247285 (Cal. Super. Ct., Sonoma Cnty.) | 2010? (Second Amended Complaint filed 2010) | Dismissed, summary judgment in favor of defendants 2015 | Bail agent sued credit card payment processing service used by county sheriffs to enjoin them from engaging in bail agent activities in violation of state licensing and regulatory requirements and for false advertising. | 183 Cal. Rptr. 3d 432 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015) (affirming trial court's dismissal) | Bail agent alleges that financial services entity that operates in pretrial release space needed to have bail bond license in order to operate legally | • False advertising, Lanham Act 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) • Claims under California Unfair Competition Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 et seq. | Government Payment Service, Inc. (payment processor for government services) | Robert W Hicks & Associates and Robert W Hicks, Kenneth R Wright, Palo Alto, CA | ||||||||||||||||||
17 | Barlow v. Safety Nat'l Cas. Corp. | No. 3:11-cv-00236 (M.D. La) | 2011 | Dismissed, summary judgment and motion to dismiss rulings in favor of defendants 2014 | Putative class action brought by mother who executed promissory note and indemnity agreement as part of bail bond transaction on son's behalf. | 856 F. Supp. 2d 828 (M.D. La. 2012) (defendants' motion to dismiss denied in part and granted in part); 2014 WL 1327922 (M.D. La. Mar. 31, 2014) (granting motion for summary judgment in part, dismissing FDCPA claims and remanding abuse of process claim to state court); 586 Fed. Appx. 191 (5th Cir. 2014) (affirming judgment in favor of defendants) | False representation of legal status of debt and threat of action that cannot legally be taken | • Fair Debt Colleciton Practices Act claims, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1692e, 1692f, 1692d • Abuse of process | Safety National Casualty Corporation (commercial surety); Single & Associates (professional law corporation) | Andre Phillip Laplace, Baton Rouge, LA | ||||||||||||||||||
18 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
19 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
20 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
21 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
22 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
23 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
24 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
25 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
26 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
27 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
28 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
29 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
30 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
31 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
32 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
33 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
34 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
35 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
36 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
37 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
38 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
39 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
40 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
41 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
42 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
43 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
44 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
45 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
46 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
47 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
48 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
49 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
50 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
51 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
52 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
53 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
54 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
55 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
56 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
57 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
58 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
59 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
60 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
61 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
62 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
63 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
64 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
65 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
66 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
67 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
68 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
69 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
70 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
71 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
72 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
73 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
74 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
75 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
76 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
77 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
78 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
79 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
80 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
81 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
82 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
83 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
84 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
85 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
86 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
87 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
88 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
89 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
90 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
91 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
92 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
93 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
94 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
95 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
96 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
97 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
98 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
99 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
100 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||