Sprint Nextel ETF class-action heads back to trial: California judge rules for new hearing

A California state judge ordered a new trial to determine damages in a class-action early termination fee lawsuit, putting the struggling No. 3 mobile phone carrier on the hook for nearly $300 million sought by plaintiffs’ lawyers.
The Sprint Nextel Corp. ETF case has been on a wild roller coaster ride since last year’s trial and subsequent rulings in the Superior Court of California in Alameda County. Both plaintiffs’ lawyers and Sprint Nextel have declared victory at points in the trial. Indeed, the amount of damages in terms of fee credits and cash recovery for the class and Sprint Nextel has been a moving target.
Judge Bonnie Sabraw’s new ruling appears to put the plaintiffs in the driver’s seat, though appeals filed by Sprint Nextel and the new trial could shift the landscape of the litigation once again.
“This is another tremendous victory for the class plaintiffs and another devastating loss for Sprint,” said Scott Bursor, the plaintiffs’ lead trial counsel. “We had already won on the key issue in the case by proving that Sprint’s termination fees are illegal. But this latest ruling eliminates any reduction or setoff against our claim and restores every penning of our $299 million victory.”
Sprint Nextel expressed displeasure at Sabraw’s decision to overturn key aspects of the jury verdict.
“We’re disappointed and baffled as to why a new trial was granted when the jury did exactly as it was asked to do,” said Matthew Sullivan, a Sprint Nextel spokesman. “There was no accusation or evidence of jury misconduct, and fairness and due process principles do not entitle unsuccessful plaintiffs’ attorneys to a ‘do over.’ The order granting a new trial on damages gives the plaintiffs’ attorneys a second bite of the apple to attempt an award of damages that they did not accomplish with the evidence presented during the first trial.”
Sullivan added: “It’s also important to note that the plaintiffs’ attorney asked the judge to overturn the portion of the jury verdict finding that subscribers breached their contracts with Sprint when they terminated early. The judge refused to do so, and has limited the new trial to the issue of damages to which Sprint is entitled.”
Sprint Nextel ETF litigation is not confined to California state court.
Bursor is representing plaintiffs in a separate $1 billion ETF class action lawsuit against Sprint Nextel in a California federal court. But that case has been complicated by a $17.5 million nationwide (excluding California) settlement of yet another ETF class action against Sprint Nextel that’s playing out in U.S. district court in New Jersey.
The mobile phone industry last year unsuccessfully lobbied the Federal Communications Commission to craft a national ETF policy that would have preempted state oversight of penalty wireless