Tribune Co. employees at the time of company’s 2007 leveraged buy-out are eligible to join a class action lawsuit against the ESOP trustee that represented their interests in the takeover by billionaire Sam Zell, a federal judge ruled Friday.

Any Tribune Co. employee or beneficiary who received or were entitled to an allocation to their employee stock ownership plans (ESOP) stock or ESOP cash accounts are now automatically members of the class suing Lisle-based GreatBanc Trust Co. for failing to fulfill its fiduciary responsibility in the deal, said Daniel Feinberg, an attorney representing the employees and other plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer’s ruling is the second set-back in less than a week for GreatBanc, the remaining defendant with significant liability in a 2008 lawsuit brought by Dan Neil and other Los Angeles Times staffers against the architects of the ill-fated going-private transaction.

The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear a securities class action case with particularly important implications for public companies based in Texas.

At issue is a 2007 court of appeals ruling that made it more difficult for shareholders to bring securities fraud class actions in Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi. If the Supreme Court sides with the shareholder plaintiff, companies in Texas could face a flood of cases that plaintiffs previously would not have filed.

U.S. authorities say the shipping company Horizon Lines LLC has agreed to plead guilty to fixing prices and to pay a $45 million fine.

A Justice Department statement Thursday says the company was accused of conspiring to fix rates and surcharges for freight transportation between the United States and Puerto Rico from May 2002 until April 2008.

Five former executives have been sentenced after pleading guilty in 2008 to charges related to the shipping conspiracy.

The Charlotte, North Carolina-based company has a fleet of 20 U.S.-flagged cargo ships that carry items including heavy equipment, medicines and consumer goods.

In June 2009, the company agreed to pay $20 million to settle a class action price-fixing lawsuit.

Bank of America Corp was hit with a lawsuit on Wednesday claiming the lending giant hid foreclosure problems that eventually led to a decline in its share price.

The suit, a proposed class action, says Bank of America concealed defects in the recording of mortgages, which harmed investors when the company had to temporarily discontinue foreclosures last fall.

"We are reviewing the lawsuit and have no further comment at this time," said Bank of America spokeswoman Shirley Norton.

Along with other lenders like JPMorgan Chase & Co and Wells Fargo, Bank of America has been the subject of scrutiny over its foreclosure practices.

Attorneys General from 50 states kicked off an investigation last year amid questions about legal documents submitted in court.

And while litigation from angry borrowers has mushroomed, many of the leading U.S. class action firms have stayed out of the fray, citing the difficulty of recovering substantial damages.

Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd, a major plaintiff firm known for bringing securities lawsuits, filed the case against Bank of America on Wednesday. Attorney Samuel Rudman was not available to comment.

The plaintiff, a union benefit plan, purchased nearly 25,000 Bank of America shares over three months last year at a high of $19.01, according to the court filing.

The day after news of the AG probe was announced last October, BofA's shares fell 69 cents from the previous day to close at $12.60, the lawsuit says.

It is unclear whether the plaintiff ever sold its shares. The lawsuit proposes a class made up of all who bought the stock between January 20, 2010 and October 19, 2010.

Bank of America concealed the fact that it did not have adequate personnel to process the huge numbers of foreclosed loans in its portfolio, the lawsuit says.

It also claims the bank concealed a practice of omitting billions of dollars in debt from its publicly reported balance sheet.

A $10-million class action lawsuit has been launched against Denny's restaurants in B.C., charging the family friendly diner chain wronged foreign workers by slashing hours, refusing to pay overtime and failing to pay for the workers' round-trip airfare.

The suit, filed Jan. 7, alleges Denny's restaurants in B.C. breached the contracts of more than 50 Filipino workers brought to Canada through the Temporary Foreign Workers Program, from December 2006 to the present. The program allows employers to hire foreigners to fill short-term labour shortages.

Lawyers Charles Gordon and Christopher Foy filed the lawsuit against Denny's parent companies, Northland Properties Corp. and Dencan Restaurants Inc. The lawyers say the suit is needed as foreign workers, eager to establish themselves in Canada and fearful of being sent home, are reticent to speak up when their rights are violated.

"They're put in a highly vulnerable position vis-a-vis their employers," Gordon said. "Many hope to become permanent residents but are afraid of making any waves that may jeopardize that."

The few that do typically face repercussions, Gordon said.

According to the lawsuit, a district manager threatened to send Maria Genalyn Reyes home to the Philippines if she chose to work at a competing restaurant chain once her contract ended.

Alfredo Sales was allegedly fired after demanding outstanding overtime pay and return airfare between the Philippines and Vancouver.

The employment contract signed by the workers states that it is the employer's obligation to pay for the transportation costs between the two countries.

Another worker hasn't been reimbursed for the cost of her airfare, did not consistently receive her promised hours of work and is owed overtime pay, the suit alleges.

A federal judge in Maine yesterday denied class-action status to four lawsuits accusing Philip Morris USA of misleading smokers about the health risks of light cigarettes.

The ruling by U.S. District Judge John A. Woodcock Jr. concerns lawsuits that were filed in Illinois, Maine, California and Washington, D.C., alleging that Henrico County-based Philip Morris USA marketed light cigarettes as healthier than regular cigarettes in violation of various consumer-protection and false-advertising laws.

The lawsuits are among 15 cases that were consolidated for pre-trial proceedings in federal court. In his ruling, Woodcock said the plaintiffs had not met the requirements for class-action status.

"While the judge has yet to rule on the remaining cases in the multidistrict litigation, we believe this decision should serve as a persuasive authority in denying class certification in those and other similar cases as well," said Murray Garnick, senior vice president and associate general counsel for Philip Morris USA parent company Altria Group Inc.

The federal court ruling in Maine yesterday was in contrast to a decision in a separate lawsuit in New Hampshire state court Monday.

In that case, a superior court judge granted class-action status to a lawsuit against Philip Morris USA over its marketing of light cigarettes. A spokesman for Philip Morris USA said the company will appeal that decision to the New Hampshire Supreme Court.

Jury selection begins Tuesday in Los Angeles Superior Court in a lending discrimination class action against Wells Fargo Bank. Class members are loan customers in minority communities in Los Angeles. Plaintiffs’ counsel will be arguing that Wells Fargo consistently and knowingly discriminated against borrowers in minority neighborhoods, resulting in these borrowers paying more for their loans than borrowers in other parts of Los Angeles County. (Opal Jones, et. al v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, et. al Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC337821). Judge Anthony J. Mohr is the presiding judge.

When certifying the class last year, Judge Mohr referred to The Unruh Civil Rights Act. The Act makes it illegal to deny, aid or incite a denial, or make any discrimination or distinction on the basis of, among other things, race, color or national origin. This includes the failure or refusal to provide all persons with full and equal advantages and services in all business establishments.

According to the class action filing, Wells Fargo introduced a computer program in 2002 called “Loan Economics,” which gave loan officers the ability to offer discounts to loan applicants that lowered overall loan costs through reduced fees and interest rates. The lawsuit alleges that branches in predominately white communities could use the program to price loans, while bank branches in predominately minority communities were prevented from doing so by Wells Fargo management.