By Linsey B. Knerl

Wow! Is it just me, or is there beginning to be a lot more action in the class-action lawsuit realm? Just when I thought the settlements were limited to some high-profile products and services, a new “warming blanket” case hits the courts. Some of these are just plain odd, but if you are affected, it may be in your best interest to check them out.

The first one involves consumers who purchased certain Sunbeam electric blankets or other warming bedding between 1991 and May 2000. The Plaintiffs allege that certain products were not “as safe as they should have been” because they were missing a safety circuit that appeared on later models. An honest oversight? Maybe, but this one will cost Sunbeam dearly. This case doesn’t cover persons making claims due to injuries (better get a personal injury lawyer for that) or for property damage. If you do own one of these older blankets, you can disable it (which you must prove), buy a new Sunbeam blanket (how convenient for Sunbeam), and file the claim for your $10-$15 payment. For full details, you must call the official toll-free number (no website for this one) at 877-777-8135.

In a totally unrelated suit, Class Members who currently or used to own land next to or under a railroad Right of Way at any time since fiber-optic cable was installed, may be eligible for some compensation. This is a tricky and kind of weird case, but apparently Sprint, Qwest, Level 3, and WilTel will pay valid claims for landowners under these conditions (with the exception of Louisiana and Tennessee residents). By following through with the suit, you may get cash benefits and a Telecommunications Easement will be granted in the Railroad Right of Way next to or over your property. If you are in the small group of folks who may be affected by this, head on over to the official website of the settlement, www.FiberOpticCableSettlement.com, for full claim details.

And in one final class-action news note, September 15 is the last date to file for the Visa Check/MasterMoney Antitrust Litigation. Those affected by this action include private individuals or companies who accepted MasterCard or Visa-branded credit or debit cards as payments for goods or services from October 25, 1992 to June 21, 2003. The case (also known as Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. et al v. Visa U.S.A. Inc. and MasterCard International, Inc) offers compensation to businesses who accepted certain forms of payment. The case alleges that:

“Merchants paid more for Visa and MasterCard off-line debit transactions than they would have paid had they been free to reject these debit transactions without losing the ability to accept Visa and MasterCard credit card transactions. These damages are called ‘off-line debit damages.’”

To see if you are eligible for compensation, check out all the details at the official claim website, www.inrevisacheck-mastermoneyantitrustlitigation.com (now that’s a mouthful!). Remember that you only have a few weeks to file your claim, and payments are being sent out soon!