Skip to main contentSkip to navigation
Hamilton Law Firm LLC
Hamilton Law Firm LLC

913-647-7512
Legal Question?

Menu
  • Home
  • Firm Overview
  • Attorney Profile
  • Practice Areas
  • Why Choose Us
  • Representative Work
  • Legal News
  • Contact Us

Practice Areas

Business Litigation
Legal Malpractice
Local Counsel
Medical Malpractice
Nursing Home Abuse
Personal Injury
Product Liability
Wrongful Death

For More Information

Fill out our online form

Home » Class Claims AT&T DSL Def…

Class Claims AT&T DSL Defective

August 2nd, 2010
Posted By
Patrick Hamilton
Tweet

New York (August 02, 2010) -- A group of consumers has slapped AT&T Operations Inc. with a putative, nationwide breach of contract and fraud class action claiming the telecommunications giant's high-speed data delivery service is systematically defective and causes Internet, phone and television connectivity problems.

More than 2 million homes use AT&T's Very High Bit-rate DSL technology, according to the complaint, which the company markets and sells under the brand name U-Verse. The product is intended to provide very high Internet speeds, clear Voice Over Internet Protocol telephony, and the capacity to watch and record multiple channels at once on different TV sets, according to the complaint.

The lead plaintiffs, who first subscribed to U-Verse between 2008 and 2010, say the service provides none of the advertised features and that they've instead experienced painfully slow Internet connections, phone call interference and frame-freezing and pixelization of movies and television channels.

“U-verse — hyped and overpromoted as a technological advance — fails of its essential purpose, in that its defective design and inferior infrastructure, built on old copper wiring, rendered it obsolete before it ever began,” the class says in its complaint.

If certified, Friday's suit would not be the only consumer class action AT&T has on its plate. In July, a federal judge certified a class in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California accusing AT&T Mobility LLC and Apple Inc. of monopolizing the aftermarket for iPhone voice and data services.

In the U-Verse suit, the putative class is represented by Denney & Barrett PC.

The case is Hancock et al. v. American Telephone and Telegraph Co. Inc. et al., case number 5:10-cv-00822, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma.

Categories: Legal News

Practice Areas

Business Litigation
Legal Malpractice
Local Counsel
Medical Malpractice
Nursing Home Abuse
Personal Injury
Product Liability
Wrongful Death

For More Information

Fill out our online form

Recent Blog Posts

18
Negligence Lawsuits: What the Plaintiff Must Prove
February 18th, 2021
Negligence occurs when a party fails to exercise proper care and, as a result, damages occur. Laws surrounding negligence and liability vary from state to state, so it’s important to contact a Kansas and Missouri injury attorney to represent your c… Read More
6
Legal Malpractice: What You Must Prove
February 6th, 2017
If you believe you were not represented properly by an attorney, a Kansas legal malpractice attorney can help determine if you may have a claim. As you can imagine, pursuing a claim against an attorney can be an uphill battle. Attorneys that may be p… Read More

Read more from our blog

Representative Work

$170,000 Jury Verdict in Negligent Misrepresenation Case
On April 24, 2018, attorney Patrick Hamilton obtained a $170,000 jury verdict in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas in a negligent misrepresentation case. Hamilton Law Firm’s client purchased a house in Kansas City, Missouri. Defendant Kathryn Sylvia was the seller’s real estate agent and an employee of defendant Platinum Realty. The sale was a “cash sale” in which payment was to be wired. The plaintiff received wiring instructions via email from Sylvia’s email account. Plaintiff forwarded the wiring instructions to his bank, which wired his money in accordance with the instructions. In actuality, the wiring instructions were prepared by a criminal hacker which caused plaintiff’s funds to be misdirected to Citi Bank in New York City. When the loss was discovered, plaintiff sued Sylvia and Platinum for negligent misrepresentation. The defendants claimed they did not email the wiring instructions to plaintiff and that plaintiff was comparatively negligent by not reviewing the wiring instructions before sending them to his bank. After a two day jury trial, the jury assigned defendants 85% of the fault and attributed 15% of the fault to plaintiff. Total damages were $196,622.67 with a net recovery to plaintiff of $167,129.27. Bain v. Platinum Realty LLC et al., Case No. 16-CV-02326-JWL. Read More
$280,000 Jury Verdict in Legal Malpractice Case (January 18, 2017)
On January 18, 2017, Hamilton Law Firm LLC obtained a $280,000.00 jury verdict in a legal malpractice lawsuit for Power Control Devices, Inc., an Olathe company specializing in the manufacture of electronic devices. The underlying litigation involved a breach of contract lawsuit against Orchid Engineering, Technologies and Consulting in the Boston, Massachusetts area. After PCD’s case had been pending for almost two years, Orchid filed a motion for summary judgment contending the lawsuit was not filed before the statutes of limitation expired. The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts agreed, dismissing Power Control’s claims as untimely. Hamilton Law firm sued Power Control’s attorney in the underlying litigation, Michael “Mick” Lerner, for legal malpractice. After a seven day jury trial in Johnson County Kansas District Court, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Power Control. PCD Verdict Form 2617 Read More

Read more about our successes

Contact Us

Google Map of Hamilton Law Firm LLC’s Location
Hamilton Law Firm LLC
8700 Monrovia, Suite 310
Lenexa, KS 66215
913-647-7512

© 2023 Hamilton Law Firm LLC
View Our Disclaimer
Law Firm Website Design by The Modern Firm

Copyright © 2023 Hamilton Law Firm LLC