Jury Hits Overstock.com With $3M Verdict in Del. Unclaimed Property Case
A Delaware jury has returned a $3 million verdict in a whistleblower suit against Overstock.com, finding after just one hour of deliberation that the online retailer had avoided reporting abandoned gift card balances to state officials.
September 24, 2018 at 04:42 PM
4 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Delaware Law Weekly
A Delaware jury has returned a $3 million verdict in a whistleblower suit against Overstock.com, finding after just one hour of deliberation that the online retailer had avoided reporting abandoned gift card balances to state officials.
The verdict, which followed a six-day trial, is likely to lead to an automatic trebling of damages, plus an award of attorney fees, bringing Overstock's potential liability to as much as $10 million in the four-and-a-half year-old case, an attorney for whistle blower William Sean French said on Monday.
In 2014, French, who had previously worked for Ohio-based CardFact, accused his former employer of creating shell companies and conspiring with retailers to evade its obligation report and return the funds to Delaware, which relies on unclaimed property for its third-largest source of revenue.
Attorneys from the Delaware Department of Justice quickly moved to intervene on behalf of the state, alleging that CardFact, now known as Card Compliant, had worked with retail companies to deprive the state of hundreds of millions of dollars in unclaimed gift card balances, in a “scheme” dating back to 2005.
In a 116-page complaint, the state alleged that CardFact and the retailers attempted to circumvent reporting requirements by forming shell companies in Ohio and Florida, where unredeemed gift card balances can't revert to state coffers. CardFact and the retailers would then issue gift cards or contractually assign the retailer's existing obligation to cardholding customers to the alleged shell companies and terminate the retailers' obligations, attorneys said.
The defendants moved for summary judgment, seeking dismissal of all claims last year. In court documents, the companies said that the assignments to non-Delaware entities were valid because the retailers had no duty to pay the value of the gift cards under the state's unclaimed property laws. Their actions, they argued, were “objectively reasonable” because Delaware had issued no definitive guidance to the contrary.
Delaware Superior Court Judge Paul R. Wallace denied the motion, paving the way for trial this month.
Stuart M. Grant, who represented French along with a team of attorneys from the Wilmington plaintiffs' firm Grant & Eisenhofer, said CardFact settled the case along with about a dozen other retailers, which had been accused of engaging in the scheme. The exact terms of those settlements are confidential, but Grant said they had secured between $25 million and $30 million, collectively.
Overstock was the only defendant to go to trial in the civil action. Argument wrapped up around 1 p.m. Sept. 20, and a panel of 12 jurors returned their verdict shortly after 2 p.m. that same day, Grant said.
“We are not surprised that the jurors had no trouble seeing through the scam that Overstock tried to pull,” Grant said in a statement last week announcing the verdict. “This case was simple and straightforward. Overstock had a legal obligation to report and turn over almost $3 million dollars from unused gift cards to the state. The company knew the law and instead of following it, they intentionally tried to evade their obligation.”
According to Grant, the case only involved actions Overstock had taken between 2005 and 2007. However, the company is also accused of similar violations that occurred between 2008 and 2012.
It would be up to the state to decide how to proceed with those allegations, Grant said. Officials could decide to either file another lawsuit or initiate an audit to recover any disputed funds. But if the company were to resist an audit, that would lay the groundwork for a separate lawsuit, he said.
Attorneys for Overstock were not immediately available to comment on Monday.
Grant & Eisenhofer attorneys Mary S. Thomas, the firm's director, and associate Laina M. Herbert also represented French in the case, captioned Delaware v. Card Compliant.
Deputy Attorneys General Thomas E. Brown, Edward K. Black and Stephen G. MacDonald of the Delaware DOJ represented the state.
David S. Eagle and Michael W. Yurkewicz of Klehr Harrison Harvey Branzburg and Martin I. Eisenstein, David Swetman-Burland and Stacy O. Stitham of Brann & Isaacson represented Overstock.
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 AllLatham, Finnegan Win $115M Muscular Dystrophy Drug Patent Verdict for Counterclaimant
2 minute readDelaware Supreme Court Adopts Broad Interpretation of Case Law on Anticompetition Provisions
3 minute read3rd Circuit Nominee Mangi Sees 'No Pathway to Confirmation,' Derides 'Organized Smear Campaign'
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Cannabis Took a Hit on Red Wednesday, but Hope Is On the Way
- 2Ben Brafman Defending Celebrity Rabbi in Lawsuit by Miami Hotel
- 3People in the News—Dec. 23, 2024—Barley Snyder, Marshall Dennehey
- 4How I Made Office Managing Partner: 'Be a Lawyer First, Foremost and Always,' Says Matthew McLaughlin of Venable
- 5Bar Report - Dec. 23
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