Try our Advanced Search for more refined results

Smith v. FirstEnergy Corp. et al

  1. December 05, 2022

    Judge OKs $49M FirstEnergy Class Settlement, $13M In Fees

    An Ohio federal judge on Monday gave his approval to a $49 million class settlement reached between FirstEnergy and its ratepayers, including more than $13 million in attorney fees, stemming from the fallout of a federal bribery probe in which the Northeast Ohio utility is entangled.

  2. October 11, 2022

    Ohio Class Seeks Approval Of $49M FirstEnergy Settlement

    A group of Ohio ratepayers suing electric utility FirstEnergy Corp. over corruption claims asked a federal judge Monday to grant final approval of a proposed $49 million class settlement.

  3. November 22, 2021

    FirstEnergy Allowed To Oppose Vacated Class Certification

    A federal judge vacated his class certification for Ohio ratepayers suing electric utility FirstEnergy Corp. over corruption claims, finding that he granted certification before the utility company had run out the clock on its chance to oppose the motion.

  4. November 10, 2021

    Judge Certifies Class In FirstEnergy Ohio Bribery Scheme Suit

    An Ohio federal judge has granted class certification to a group of Ohio consumers who claim that FirstEnergy Corp. received bailout legislation in exchange for $60 million in bribes.

  5. February 11, 2021

    FirstEnergy Must Face Discovery Over Ohio Bribery Scheme

    An Ohio federal judge on Thursday rejected FirstEnergy Corp.'s request to pause discovery in Ohio ratepayers' putative class allegations that the business received bailout legislation in exchange for $60 million in bribes, deciding that the public interest weighs in favor of letting discovery proceed.

  6. February 10, 2021

    FirstEnergy Must Face Suit Over $60M Bribery Scheme

    FirstEnergy Corp. on Wednesday lost its bid to escape Ohio ratepayers' class claims the business paid about $60 million in bribes to secure approval of $1 billion bailout legislation, with a federal judge finding the customers sufficiently alleged they would face higher costs under the bill as a result of the purportedly illicit payments.