A Record Of Success In Protecting Consumers

Heins Mills has represented consumers injured by violations of a wide variety of deceptive trade practices and consumer protection laws. The firm has brought claims on behalf of all types of consumers, including purchasers of prescription drugs, long distance telephone service, air compressors, smoke detectors, lawn mower engines and hearing aids. Examples of our consumer law cases include:

  • In Re Target Corporation Customer Data Security Breach Litig., MDL No. 14-2522 (PAM/JJK) (D. Minn.). We serve as lead counsel for consumers of Target stores across the country victimized by one of the largest breaches of payment-card security in U.S. retail history. Our legal theories and complaint in this case surmounted a motion to dismiss, as of that time a rare victory in these cases, and now serve as models for plaintiff's counsel in other data breach litigation, which has been increasingly successful. The settlement was appealed to the Eighth Circuit and has been fully briefed.

  • In re The Home Depot, Inc., Customer Data Security Breach Litig., No. MDL No. 14-02583-TWT (N.D. Ga.). In this case, another one of the largest payment card security breaches in U.S. history, we serve as a member of the Financial Institution Plaintiffs' Steering Committee and Law & Briefing Committee. On May 17, 2016, after our firm shouldered principal responsibility for briefing for the class, the court largely denied Home Depot's motion to dismiss the complaint, allowing all of plaintiffs' claims except for two state consumer statutory claims to proceed. The case has been settled.

  • In re Fiber Optic Cable Litig. (multiple jurisdictions). We serve as co-lead counsel in multi-state litigation against major telecommunications companies and utilities to vindicate the rights of landowners whose property was used for the installation of fiber optic cable without compensation. In that capacity we participated in fashioning an innovative global settlement that comprises separate agreements on a state-by-state basis. To date there have been settlements in 42 states in a total amount of nearly $150 million.

  • In re Universal Service Fund Telephone Billing Practices Litig., MDL No. 1468 (D. Kan.). We were one of three co-lead counsel representing business and residential customers nationwide alleging a conspiracy to fix USF surcharges and breach of contract claims against long-distance telephone companies. The November 2008 trial resulted in a verdict for the class, which was affirmed on appeal.

  • In re Lawnmower Engines Horsepower Marketing & Sales Practices Litig., MDL No. 1999 (E.D. Wis.). We represented classes of consumers nationwide in this nationwide class action alleging consumer fraud, civil conspiracy and unjust enrichment claims against manufacturers of lawnmowers and lawnmower engines. Heins Mills' leadership resulted in settlements with all defendants.

  • Infant Formula Antitrust Litig. (multiple jurisdictions). We were co-lead counsel for classes of consumers asserting price-fixing against infant formula manufacturers in separate actions venued in seventeen states. Collectively, the cases were settled for $64 million in cash and infant formula products.

Judicial Recognition of Heins Mills & Olson's Skill and Effectiveness

Among judges, clients and peers, Heins Mills enjoys a reputation for its aggressive and skillful advocacy in class litigation of national and international import. The following are examples of praise we have received from the bench:

  • The Hon. Paul A. Magnuson presiding in In re Target Corporation Customer Data Sec. Breach Litigation wrote: "It is difficult to imagine a settlement that more comprehensively addresses all of the harm suffered by a class as the settlement here. And the comprehensive nature of the settlement, in turn, reflects the adequacy, indeed the superiority, of the representation the class received from its named Plaintiffs and from class counsel."
  • The presiding judge in AOL Time Warner, the Hon. Shirley W. Kram, complimented our firm for its "exceptional lawyering in this case" and added that she "continues to be impressed with the quality of representation provided by [Heins Mills & Olson], its prosecution of the lawsuit, and its negotiation of the Settlement." She added, "Not only do the parties dispute the amount of damages sustained by the Class, they continue to dispute the very existence of damages. In light of this fundamental disagreement, the $2.65 billion Settlement secured by Plaintiffs is all the more impressive."
  • The judge presiding over the multidistrict litigation in In re Monosodium Glutamate Antitrust Litigation, the Hon. Paul A. Magnuson, said of our work as co-lead counsel: "I'll make no bones about this, I think this is as fine a job of plaintiff lawyering as I've ever seen, . . . I particularly take my hat off to the plaintiffs' counsel here."
  • The judge who approved the Broadcom settlement, the Hon. Dickran Tevrizian, described it as "an exceptional result given the complexity of the case, and despite keenly contested and very complex facts. . . . Class Counsel's ability to obtain a favorable settlement despite formidable opposition confirms their immense skill."

How To Contact Us

Heins Mills & Olson, P.L.C., is a Minneapolis, Minnesota, law firm that focuses on consumer protection cases nationwide. We can be reached at 612-338-4605, or contact us online.