Judge Preliminarily Approves $18.5M Settlement With Viridian Energy
A federal judge has granted preliminary approval of a class action settlement against Viridian Energy. The settlement is worth $18.5 million.
February 22, 2018 at 11:59 AM
3 minute read
A federal judge in Connecticut has preliminarily approved a $18.5 million class action settlement involving claims that Viridian Energy overcharged customers.
The preliminary approval from U.S. District Judge Stefan Underhill on Friday covers two classes who claimed the Norwalk-based energy company misled customers about its variable rate plans. Class members alleged Viridian enticed them to shift their electric service with promises of meaningful savings that never materialized.
For example, Pennsylvania class member Steven Landau claimed Viridian lured him from his local utility in 2013 with promises of low, stable electricity rates. Six months after he signed up, Landau's account was transferred to a variable rate plan and his rates more than doubled.
Viridian is represented by several attorneys, primarily Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom and Venable. None of the firms responded to a request for comment Thursday.
Final approval for the $18.5 million settlement will come after a hearing in Bridgeport on June 25. At that hearing, the court will consider the certification of each of the settlement classes, the appointments of the class representatives, the appointment of class counsel, the settlement agreement and whether the preliminary settlement should receive final approval.
The two groups would include an average usage class and an above-average usage class. The average usage class would cover anyone enrolled in a Viridian variable rate electricity or gas plan with an average annual utilization rate of 25,000 or less kilowatt hours, or 2,500 or less therms.
The above-average usage class would cover anyone enrolled in a Viridian variable rate electricity or gas plan with an average annual utilization of more than 25,000 kilowatt hours, or more than 2,500 therms.
The period for both classes is July 1, 2009, through Dec. 31, 2016.
The cash benefit for members of the average usage class cannot exceed $425 per valid claim, while it cannot exceed $500 per valid claim for the above-average usage class member.
The plaintiffs are represented by attorneys from Izard, Kindall & Raabe; Wittels Law; Hymowitz Law Group; Kohn Swift & Garf; Marcus & Mack; Greenfield & Goodman; and Cuneo, Gilbert & LaDuca.
As part of the agreement, Viridian must abide by the company's policies regarding advertising and marketing claims.
Within 30 days of Underhill's order, the settlement administrator must create and maintain a website applicable to each settlement class that will provide, among other things, class counsel's contact information and a method of electronic submission of claim forms. Class members will have 90 days from the commencement notice date, which has yet to be set, to submit a claim form for any benefits available under the settlement.
Robert Izard, a partner at Izard Kindall, said the settlement is fair for Viridian consumers.
“This all started five or six years ago and includes settlements with several cases, including those in Pennsylvania, New York, Massachusetts and Connecticut,” Izard said. “This was a global resolution of overcharging claims against Viridian. It's a good agreement for consumers.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllSecond Circuit Upholds $5M Judgment Against Trump in E. Jean Carroll Case
4 minute readArt of the Settlement: Trump Attorney Reveals Strategy in ABC Lawsuit
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250