Pastor Law Office specializes in Class Action litigation on behalf of investors, consumers and small businesses. The firm has extensive experience in complex litigation and works on cases involving:
Shareholder Rights/Securities Litigation
We fight to win compensation for illegal corporate price-fixing, market allocation and tying arrangements.
Work with Pastor Law Office
If you are an attorney interested in referring a case or partnering on a class action, please contact us at 617 -742-9700 or email@example.com.
If you are a plaintiff with a possible class action case, consider reading more about class action cases below and complete and submit our inquiry form or call us at 617 -742-9700.
Learn about Class Action
A number of cases litigated by David Pastor of Pastor Law Office have produced significant legal developments, including:
In re Blech Securities Litigation
This was a national class action alleging a market manipulation scheme to inflate the prices of certain biotechnology company securities. The case resulted in settlements which are confidential, and one opinion from the case has been frequently cited by commentators on the issue of clearing broker liability.
Molfetas v. Stainsafe, Inc. et al.
A national class arbitration on behalf of a class of persons who purchased furniture warranties from Stainsafe, alleging that the furniture warranties were worth less than the amounts paid for them by class members at the time of purchase, due to undisclosed coverage limitations and exclusions. The arbitrator certified the class of all person who purchased the warranties, based on the theory that the warranties were either worthless or worth less than the amounts paid for them at the time of purchase, and that class members suffered damages even if they were never denied benefits under a warranty or even if they never made a warranty claim.
Kelley v. CVS Pharmacy, Inc., et al.
The court ruled that CVS’ use of confidential customer prescription information, which it obtained for the sole purpose of filling prescriptions, without the consent of the pharmacy customers, constituted an unfair and deceptive practice under the Massachusetts consumer protection act.