Lawyers Turn Out the Lights on Power Co-op Suits After Appellate Ruling
When attorneys sued Georgia's electric power cooperatives on behalf of millions of current and former power customer members, they claimed the cooperatives, known as electric membership corporations, for decades had withheld as much as $2 billion in profits that should have, by law, been distributed regularly to their members.
June 30, 2017 at 05:35 PM
9 minute read
When attorneys sued Georgia's electric power cooperatives on behalf of millions of current and former power customer members, they claimed the cooperatives, known as electric membership corporations, for decades had withheld as much as $2 billion in profits that should have, by law, been distributed regularly to their members.
The two class action suits were filed the same year that one of the larger cooperatives, Cobb EMC, concluded a six-year legal battle over how it had made use of those profits, known as patronage capital. It agreed to distribute to current and former power co-op members $98 million in excess profits the EMC had withheld virtually since its inception more than 70 years ago. But in late June, the plaintiffs' lawyers threw in the towel, deciding against petitioning the Georgia Supreme Court to review a 75-page state appellate opinion handed down June 9 affirming the suits' dismissal after court-ordered mediation failed.
“We viewed it as a fairly straightforward case. The EMCs were holding money that ultimately belonged to former members but they weren't giving it back,” said Ken Canfield, lead counsel for former EMC members who sued. “We believe that part of the idea of being a cooperative is that once a member leaves the co-op, they have an expectation that they are going to be repaid their share of money that was generated by its operations. What the Court of Appeals has effectively held is that the EMCs can keep that money as long as they want.”
This content has been archived.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
© 2024 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 All'Paragraph V Displaced Lathrop': High Court Mulls Sovereign Immunity Waiver Disputes
7 minute read11th Circuit Revives Project Veritas' Defamation Lawsuit Against CNN
State Appeals Court 'Reluctantly' Remands $1.7B Punitive Damages, Sanctions Against Ford for Fatal Rollover
High Court to Weigh If Amended Complaints Establish Sovereign Immunity Waiver
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1‘Not a Kindergarten Teacher’: Judge Blasts Keller Postman, Jenner & Block in Mass Arb Dispute
- 2A&O Shearman, Hogan Lovells and the Stories That Shaped Africa This Year
- 3Borden Ladner Gervais Cyber Expert Warns of AI-Boosted Ransomware Attacks
- 4Phila. Judge Upholds $68.5M Verdict Over Construction Worker's Death
- 5Biden Vetoes Bill to Create More Federal Judgeships
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