Katrina Carroll heads Lite DePalma Greenberg’s Chicago office and has over fifteen years of experience litigating class actions. Over the course of her career, she has recovered more than $1 billion for aggrieved consumers, investors and businesses. Katrina’s class action experience spans a wide array of areas, including consumer fraud, antitrust and securities fraud. In 2018, Katrina was selected by National Trial Lawyers Association as one of the top 25 class action trial lawyers in the State of Illinois.
Katrina recently served as Co-Lead counsel in In Re: Rust-Oleum Restore Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation (MDL; N.D. Ill.), a sprawling products liability MDL relating to defective deck resurfacing products. She was instrumental in negotiating a $9.3 million settlement providing meaningful relief to consumers, which received final approval in March of 2017. During the final approval hearing, the Honorable Amy J. St. Eve of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, who presided over the litigation, praised Ms. Carroll as a “model I wish all lawyers would follow.”
Katrina currently serves as court-appointed co-lead counsel in Lewert v. P.F. Chang’s China Bistro, Inc. (N.D. Ill.), representing customers whose personal financial information was stolen in a security breach and as co-lead counsel on behalf of a certified class in Mednick v. Precor Inc. (N.D. Ill), which involves defects in the heart-rate monitoring capabilities of Precor fitness machines.
“My clients are people of principle who pursue claims against enormous companies,” says Katrina. “They expect and deserve an attorney who will go to the mat for them, regardless of the size and scope of the case. It’s the proverbial David and Goliath situation and they need a strong advocate in their corner.”
Since joining Lite DePalma in 2001, Katrina has represented clients in a broad range of class actions and complex litigation.
Katrina is particularly experienced in product liability matters. She served as Co-Lead Counsel in a multi-district product liability matter against Rust-Oleum relating to defective deck resurfacing products. She currently represents a class of consumers against Precor for defective heart-rate monitoring systems in Precor treadmills.
As personally identifiable information has become an increasingly important — and vulnerable — asset for businesses, Katrina is involved in some of the most challenging and exciting privacy class action litigations in the country today. Among other matters, she is helping numerous clients pursue redress and compensation for data privacy violations, violations of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and security breaches against various companies. In her data breach matter against P.F. Chang’s China Bistro, Katrina obtained a landmark ruling in the Seventh Circuit hailed as one of the “top privacy cases” of 2016.
Early in her career, Katrina litigated some of the most prominent securities class actions in the country as Co-Lead counsel for defrauded investors, including In re Motorola Securities Litigation (N.D. Ill.), where LDG achieved a $193 million settlement, and in In re Tenet Healthcare Corp. Securities Litigation, (C.D. Cal.), which resulted in collective settlements to aggrieved investors of $281.5 million (including a $65 million auditor settlement, one of the largest of all time).
Katrina draws on her trial skills to develop and deliver effective presentations on class action topics to legal and industry colleagues. She is a nationally recognized authority and has spoken at various conferences, including the American Bar Association’s Annual National Institute on Class Actions (2014), Perrin’s Class Action Litigation Conference (2015), the American Association for Justice’s Annual Convention (2016), Loyola University School of Law’s Consumer Law Review Academic Symposium (2017), Practicing Law Institute’s Consumer Financial Services Institute (2018), the American Bar Association Section of Litigation Annual Conference (2018) and the Class Action Mastery Program hosted by HB Litigation Conferences (2018).
In April 2018, Ms. Carroll was honored to appear as a panelist at “May it Please the Court: Symposium on Women Lawyers in the Courtroom,” a prestigious event sponsored by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois and the Chicago Bar Association.
Katrina frequently appears as a panelist on class action issues at the Chicago Bar Association. She currently serves on the Advisory Board of Loyola University School of Law’s Institute for Consumer Antitrust Studies. She is a member of the Class Action Trial Lawyers Association, the Chicago Bar Association and a former member of New Jersey’s John C. Lifland American Inn of Court.
Nicks v. Koch Meat Co., No. 16-CV-6446, 2017 WL 2080420 (N.D. Ill. May 15, 2017) (in class action under the Fair Labor Standards Act, denying defendants’ complex jurisdictional motion in its entirety).
Mednick v. Precor, Inc., No. 14 C 3624, 2017 WL 1021994 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 16, 2017) (certifying multi-state consumer fraud class of consumers purchasing treadmills).
Keith v. Ferring Pharm., Inc., No. 15 C 10381, 2016 WL 5391224 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 27, 2016) (sustaining most of plaintiffs claims in consumer matter involving fertility drug).
Salam v. Lifewatch, Inc., No. 13 CV 9305, 2016 WL 8905321 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 6, 2016) (certifying class of consumers alleging violations of Telephone Consumer Protection Act).
Lewert v. P.F. Chang's China Bistro, Inc., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 6766 (7th Cir. Apr. 14, 2016) (district court erred in dismissing data breach-related claims of two customers for lack of standing).
In re Rust-Oleum Restore Mktg., Sales Practices & Prods. Liab. Litig., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1841 (N.D. Ill. 2016) (sustaining majority of plaintiffs’ claims in breach of warranty and consumer fraud matter).
Norberg v. Shutterfly, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 175433 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 29, 2015) (finding jurisdiction against defendant and that plaintiff stated a claim under the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act).
In re Life Time Fitness, Inc., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 163186 (D. Minn. Dec. 1, 2015) (granting final approval of TCPA settlement).
Mednick v. Precor, Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159687 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 13, 2014) (permitting consumer fraud and warranty claims relating to defective heart rate monitoring equipment).
Salam v. Lifewatch, Inc., 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 143222 (N.D. Ill. Sept. 22, 2014) (denying motion to dismiss and strike class allegations in Telephone Consumer Protection Act matter).
Shelton v. Restaurant.com, Inc., 214 N.J. 419 (2013) (answering certified questions regarding New Jersey’s Truth in Consumer Contract, Warranty and Notice Act (“TCCWNA”)).
Coiro v. Wachovia Bank, N.A., 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 125514 (D.N.J. Oct. 28, 2011) (joint bank account holder plausibly alleged that banks were liable for placing administrative hold on the account when a co-holder filed for bankruptcy protection).
New Jersey v. Sprint Corp., 531 F. Supp. 2d 1273 (D. Kan 2008) (sustaining complaint for securities fraud under Tellabs standard).
In re Tenet Healthcare Corp. Securities Litigation, No. CV 02-8462-RSWL (RZx), 2007 WL 5673884 (C.D. Cal. Dec. 5, 2007).
In re Motorola Securities Litigation, 505 F. Supp. 2d 501, 504 (N.D. Ill. 2007) (denying in substantial part defendants’ motions for summary judgment in certified nationwide securities fraud class action; case settled on eve of trial for $190 million).
Katrina Carroll was selected by National Trial Lawyers Association as one of the top 25 class action trial lawyers in the State of Illinois
Katrina Carroll was mentioned in an article in Law360.com titled, "Judge Won't Rethink Partial Cert. In Heart Monitor Suit." To read this article, click here.
Lite DePalma Greenberg is pleased to announce that the settlement class consisting of purchasers of Rust-Oleum’s Restore Products in In Re: Rust-Oleum Restore Marketing Sales Practices And Products Liability Litigation, Case No. MDL No. 2602, Case No. 1:15-cv-1364 (N.D. Ill.) received final approval of the $9.3 million settlement reached in October 2016 with defendant Rust-Oleum Corp. The multidistrict litigation involved 13 lawsuits accusing Rust-Oleum of marketing its Restore Products as rejuvenating for wooden and concrete decks, when, in actuality, the products peeled-off and left decks in need of repair. The settlement provides relief relative to the injuries suffered by settlement class members. Katrina Carroll, Member of the Firm, is co-lead counsel for the settlement class. During the final approval hearing, Jude Amy St. Eve, who presided over the litigation and the settlement, told Katrina Carroll, , “You are a model I wish all lawyers would follow.” To read more about the settlement, click here.
On September 6, 2016, the Northern District of Illinois granted certification to a class of individuals who received unsolicited phone calls to their cellular telephones from Lifewatch, Inc., a medical alert system provider, from October 16, 2013 through the present. Salam v. Lifewatch, Inc., Case No. 13 CV 9305 (Dkt. No. 121). Katrina Carroll, Esquire, of Lite DePalma Greenberg, LLC, was appointed co-lead counsel for the Class.
Lite DePalma Greenberg's P.F. Changs Data Breach case named one of Top Privacy Cases in 2016. To read this article, click here.
Katrina Carroll was mentioned in an article on Law360, "Shutterfly Hit With Privacy Suit Over Facial Recognition". To read this article, click here.
Katrina Carroll was quoted in an article on ABC News 10, "Class action lawsuit filed in San Diego against Anthem". Click here to view this article.
Katrina Carroll was a speaker/panelist for "Playing in the Not So Friendly Confines: Offensive and Defensive Strategies for Litigating Privacy and Data-Breach Class Actions in this Season's High-Tech e-Commerce Game," at the 18th Annual National Institute on Class Actions held in Chicago, Illinois, October 23-24, 2014.
Katrina Carroll was a presenter at the Chicago Bar Association’s 2014 seminar on “The Ethics of Class Action Settlements.”
Bruce D. Greenberg and Katrina Carroll were mentioned in the New Jersey Law Journal in connection with their success in defeating a motion by Wells Fargo Bank to dismiss a class action case that LDG brought against the bank and its predecessor.
June 21, 2018
Drop it Like it's Not: "Ringless" Voicemails and the TCPA
Uninvited robocalls and spam texts can be extremely annoying to consumers. Yet these methods of direct communications are widely used by businesses and the numbers are growing each year. In 2017, the Federal Trade Commission received 7,157,370 consumer complaints regarding unsolicited robocalls, an increase of almost 2 million from the prior year (see https://www.ftc.gov/policy/reports/policy-reports/commission-staff-reports/national-do-not-call-registry-data-book-fy-2). Consumers are supposed to get protection from harassing calls under the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA") which regulates these activities and confers on the consumer the right to sue.
March 1, 2018
"I Don't Recall": Witness Memory Lapses and Contempt of Court
Testifying at a deposition can be a stressful experience. Witnesses must testify under oath before many lawyers, with a court reporter transcribing everything they say. Sometimes depositions are even videotaped. It is no wonder that witnesses can be nervous and want to be careful to make sure their testimony is not misinterpreted or later used against them.
November 9, 2017
Plaintiffs' Lawyers Beware: Lessons from the Subway Sandwich Footlong Litigation
Over the past few years, the Seventh Circuit has carefully scrutinized class action settlements, and some for good cause, given the circumstances of some very notorious cases well known to the class action bar. The most recent Subway sandwich Footlong case is yet another notorious example of a questionable class action settlement that did not pass muster.
July 20, 2017
A Giant Step in the Right Direction: the Northern District of Illinois' Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot Project
For newly filed cases on or after June 1, 2017, the Northern District of Illinois (generally regarded as a very active District in case management procedures) began participating in a three- year "Mandatory Initial Discovery Pilot Project" (or "MIDP"), which will significantly affect civil litigation, especially in complex class actions. This novel project was endorsed by the Judicial Conference of the United States and is intended to reduce the cost and delay often involved in the initial stages of discovery.
March 23, 2017
Shrink Wrap Agreements: The Third Circuit Thinks Outside the Box
My last post dealt with the four "wraps": arbitration clauses presented on the internet in connection with consumer transactions. There is yet another arbitration "wrap" worthy of discussion, but it's not an internet-based "wrap." Rather, as the name implies, "shrink wrap" agreements are printed agreements packaged in boxes containing various consumer products. These agreements are ubiquitous and they raise unique issues in the arbitration context because of the way in which they are presented.
December 1, 2016
Internet Agreements to Arbitrate: Know the Four "Wraps"
As any lawyer practicing in the field of consumer litigation knows, arbitration clauses have become commonplace in consumer agreements. Arbitration shuts the courthouse door and effectively prevents people from pursuing class actions and vindicating their rights for small injuries. The plaintiffs' bar has been fighting against forced arbitration for years, with limited success. The most successful attacks are where, applying traditional contract principles, plaintiffs can show that no valid agreement to arbitrate was formed.
September 15, 2016
My contract auto-renewed! Am I screwed?
Any consumer who signs a contract for services of any kind should be on the lookout for an automatic renewal clause. These provisions (also known as "Evergreen Clauses") typically specify that the contract will continue if not cancelled within a specific amount of time. Often, the contract will be extended for the same period provided in the original agreement, and this can be many months and even years at a time! It is easy to see why vendors like automatic renewal provisions: they eliminate administrative burdens in having to keep track of expiring agreements and having their customers agree to new contracts. For the consumer, however, automatic renewal clauses can be extremely problematic if not properly disclosed.
May 12, 2016
Life After Comcast: What Have We Learned?
Are plaintiffs required, at the class certification stage, to submit a model showing that damages are capable of class-wide proof? And if plaintiffs do submit a damages model, is it enough to show statistically that the average class member suffered harm even if some may not have suffered any damage at all? These questions, which are of critical importance to plaintiffs and will heavily influence how class actions are prosecuted in the future, have come to the forefront in the last few years in the wake of the oft-cited and carefully scrutinized 2013 Supreme Court decision in Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 133 S. Ct. 1426 (2013). There, the Court decertified a class of Comcast subscribers and ruled that the plaintiffs could not show at the certification stage that damages could be measured class-wide. As a result, the Court found that the plaintiffs failed to make the requisite showing of predominance under Federal Rule 23(b)(3).
February 11, 2016
Faces in the Crowd: Protecting Your Biometric Information in the Internet Age
In the digital world of today, we know that biometric recognition technologies, including fingerprint, face, voice and eye recognition, are a fact of life. Often, these systems are there for additional security purposes, or even for our own convenience.
October 22, 2015
"I've been ripped off! Can I represent consumers in other states?"
Can a resident of Illinois who purchased a falsely-advertised product represent a class of people who bought that product in California? And if yes, which state's law applies? Illinois, California, neither or both? These questions arise often in class litigation and the answers are complex and depend heavily on the nature of the case and the specific state laws involved.
April 23, 2015
"Notice of Class Action Settlement?" Yes, please!
So, here's the scene: after a long day, you're standing in the kitchen and sorting through a huge pile of mail. Between bills and catalogues, you spot an ominous, legalistic "NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT," most of its text written in tiny 4-point font. At the top (and perhaps in oh so distinguishable 5-point font), you see that "you are not being sued." "Phew! What a relief," you think as you toss the notice into the trash. You have no clue that you're actually throwing good money away with yesterday's dinner scraps.