Shaquille O'Neal to pay $1.8 million to settle FTX class action lawsuit
Former NBA player Shaquille O'Neal will pay $1.8 million to settle a class action lawsuit related to the demise of cryptocurrency exchange FTX.
O'Neal, and other celebrities like Tom Brady and Stephen Curry, were named in the lawsuit in 2022. They had been accused of touting FTX as a reputable and trustworthy investment option via paid endorsements. The proposed settlement only pertains to O'Neal.
Three years ago FTX was the third-largest cryptocurrency exchange, but it ended up with billions of dollars worth of losses and had to seek bankruptcy protection. The Bahamas-based company and its founder, Sam Bankman-Fried, came under investigation by state and federal authorities for allegedly investing depositors funds in ventures without their approval.
Before its failure, FTX was known to use high-profile Hollywood and sports celebrities to promote its products. It had the naming rights to a Formula One racing team as well as a sports arena in Miami. Its commercials featured 'Seinfeld' creator Larry David, as well as Brady, the former quarterback of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and New England Patriots, basketball players O'Neal and Curry, and tennis star Naomi Osaka.
Bankman-Fried was sentenced to 25 years in prison in March 2024. A little more than a month after that, FTX said in a court filing that nearly all of its customers would receive the money back that they were owed.
While the proposed settlement with O'Neal had been agreed to in April, the payment amount and other terms were disclosed in a filing with the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, earlier this week.
The settlement class includes anyone who deposited funds into FTX or bought its FTT token between May 2019 and late 2022.
Monday Mornings
The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week.
The agreement, which still needs court approval, would provide O'Neal with a broad release from future claims and also includes a stipulation that he can't seek reimbursement from the FTX estate.
The payment will be made within 30 days of the settlement being finalized, according to the filing.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
7 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Thunder break NBA record for total points in a season, including playoffs
INDIANAPOLIS (AP) — A record for Oklahoma City: No team in NBA history has scored more points in a season than the Thunder. It's a nuanced record, taking into account both regular season and playoff games. And technically, the Thunder would have broken the record on Wednesday if their appearance in the NBA Cup championship game — which is considered an exhibition — counted in any league totals. But now, no matter how one counts, it belongs to the Thunder. They came into Game 4 of the NBA Finals against the Indiana Pacers needing 68 points for the record and got it on a free throw by NBA MVP Shai Gilgeous-Alexander with 6:09 left in the third quarter on Friday night. That gave the Thunder 12,162 for the season, breaking the mark of 12,161 scored by the Golden State Warriors in 104 games during the 2018-19 season. Friday's game was the 102nd official contest for the Thunder this season. (They scored 81 points in the NBA Cup championship game loss to Milwaukee in December, a point total and outcome that doesn't factor into any season stats.) The total-points record is the latest entry on a history-making season for the Thunder, who set a franchise record with 68 regular-season wins and — if they win the NBA title — would become the fourth team in league history to post at least 84 victories in a full season. Only Golden State (88 wins in 2015-16), Chicago (87 in 1995-96) and the Bulls again (84 in 1996-97) have reached 84 wins in a season. 'I think there's just a lot of integrity to the team,' Thunder coach Mark Daigneault said when asked how the team doesn't seem fazed by its numbers. 'I think that starts with the makeup that these guys have. Great psychological makeup, competitive makeup, personal makeup. Then over time we've had to really kind of forge into this version of ourselves, in visible spaces.' The total-points mark is obviously fueled by longevity of the season. The Thunder were only fourth in points per game during the regular season behind Cleveland, Memphis and Denver, and when adding in playoffs Oklahoma City's scoring average this season was only 27th in NBA history. Thursdays Keep up to date on sports with Mike McIntyre's weekly newsletter. That said, no matter how the finals end, it has been a season that will be in the Thunder record books for a long time. In addition to the scoring, the Thunder are currently second all-time in average point differential per game (12.2 entering Friday) behind only the 1970-71 Milwaukee Bucks. It helps illustrate how big a turnaround the Thunder have enjoyed after going 22-50 in the 2020-21 season, then 24-58 a year later and 40-42 the year after that. 'We haven't relied on anything outside the outcomes,' Daigneault said. 'The noise, we haven't relied on that when we weren't winning. We haven't relied on that while we were building. We haven't relied on that while we were rising. We're not relying on that now that we're in a different position.' ___ AP NBA:
Winnipeg Free Press
9 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Trump clears path for Nippon Steel investment in US Steel, so long as it fits the government's terms
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump on Friday signed an executive order paving the way for a Nippon Steel investment in U.S. Steel, so long as the Japanese company complies with a 'national security agreement' submitted by the federal government. Trump's order didn't detail the terms of the national security agreement. But U.S. Steel and Nippon Steel said in a joint statement that the agreement stipulates that approximately $11 billion in new investments will be made by 2028 and includes giving the U.S. government a 'golden share' — essentially veto power to ensure the country's national security interests are protected. 'We thank President Trump and his Administration for their bold leadership and strong support for our historic partnership,' the two companies said. 'This partnership will bring a massive investment that will support our communities and families for generations to come. We look forward to putting our commitments into action to make American steelmaking and manufacturing great again.' The companies have completed a U.S. Department of Justice review and received all necessary regulatory approvals, the statement said. 'The partnership is expected to be finalized promptly,' the statement said. The companies offered few details on how the golden share would work and what investments would be made. Trump said Thursday that he would as president have 'total control' of what U.S. Steel did as part of the investment. Trump said then that the deal would preserve '51% ownership by Americans.' The Japan-based steelmaker had been offering nearly $15 billion to purchase the Pittsburgh-based U.S. Steel in a merger that had been delayed on national security concerns starting during Joe Biden's presidency. Trump opposed the purchase while campaigning for the White House, yet he expressed optimism in working out an arrangement once in office. 'We have a golden share, which I control,' said Trump, although it was unclear what he meant by suggesting that the federal government would determine what U.S. Steel does as a company. Trump added that he was 'a little concerned' about what presidents other than him would do with their golden share, 'but that gives you total control.' Still, Nippon Steel has never said it was backing off its bid to buy and control U.S. Steel as a wholly owned subsidiary. The proposed merger had been under review by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, during the Trump and Biden administrations. The order signed Friday by Trump said the CFIUS review provided 'credible evidence' that Nippon Steel 'might take action that threatens to impair the national security of the United States,' but such risks might be 'adequately mitigated' by approving the proposed national security agreement. Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. The order doesn't detail the perceived national security risk and only provides a timeline for the national security agreement. The White House declined to provide details on the terms of the agreement. The order said the draft agreement was submitted to U.S. Steel and Nippon Steel on Friday. The two companies must successfully execute the agreement as decided by the Treasury Department and other federal agencies that are part CFIUS by the closing date of the transaction. Trump reserves the authority to issue further actions regarding the investment as part of the order he signed on Friday. ___ Associated Press writer Marc Levy in Harrisburg, Pa., contributed to this report.
Vancouver Sun
11 hours ago
- Vancouver Sun
Delivery services under legal scrutiny for alleged 'drip pricing'
The practice known as 'drip pricing' is front and centre again in an action by the federal Competition Bureau against DoorDash and in a proposed class-action lawsuit brought by a Toronto law firm against Uber Eats. Drip pricing generally involves enticing customers by advertising low prices, but charging extra mandatory fees, usually when they are checking out. It continues to come under fire because 'disclosure around pricing and fees in various consumer transactions is, at times, less than thorough and transparent,' says Mike Robb, partner with London, Ontario-based law firm, Siskinds. Start your day with a roundup of B.C.-focused news and opinion. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Sunrise will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. The Competition Bureau says w hen 'the represented price is inaccurate, it makes it more difficult for consumers to comparison shop and result(s) in unfair outcomes for honest competitors.' Canada's competition watchdog is hauling DoorDash Inc. and its Canadian subsidiary before the Competition Tribunal, accusing them of portraying the online cost of delivery as lower than the price consumers ultimately pay. The Competition Bureau says it investigated and is alleging DoorDash customers paid more, due to mandatory fees, added during checkout. The extra fees, the bureau says, include charges such as extra amounts for delivering items a further distance and for placing smaller orders. The bureau alleges the discretionary charges were sometimes framed as taxes. The bureau alleges DoorDash may have used drip pricing for close to a decade to make nearly $1 billion from mandatory fees, according to the Canadian Press . The bureau is asking the Competition Tribunal to order the company to stop the practice, cease portraying fees as taxes, pay a penalty and issue restitution to affected consumers. However, DoorDash is pushing back. 'This application is a misguided and excessive attempt to target one of Canada's leading local commerce platforms,' DoorDash spokesperson Trent Hodson told CP . 'It unfairly singles out DoorDash, and we intend to vigorously defend ourselves against these claims.' Still, the bureau is standing its ground. 'Our litigation against DoorDash is another example of our efforts to ensure consumers are not misled and can trust the prices they see online. We urge all businesses to review their pricing practices and make sure they comply with the law,' said Matthew Boswell, commissioner of competition in a press release . The Competition Bureau has been more aggressive of late in battling drip pricing. Last fall, the bureau won a deceptive marketing case against Cineplex Inc. , noted Robb. It had been adding a mandatory $1.50 online booking fee. The company was ordered to pay a financial penalty of almost $39 million. Last summer, says Robb, the bureau reached an agreement with SiriusXM Canada . In that case, the company was ordered to pay a $3.3 million penalty over adding a fee on subscription plans that increased the monthly cost. Meanwhile, legal action against drip pricing is not exclusive to public regulators. Law firms that navigate class actions are getting in on the act too. Toronto firm, Koskie Minsky filed a statement of claim against Uber Eats with the Ontario Superior Court Justice last month. It alleges Uber Eats has been hiding an additional service fee within its overall delivery costs. The proposed class action alleges that Uber misrepresented the true cost of delivery by not disclosing the service fee until the final stage of the transaction, 'often obscured under a 'Taxes & Other Fees' line item, a practice known as drip pricing,' says the law firm on its website. The action has been brought on behalf of Canadian residents who on or after May 16, 2023, placed a delivery order using Uber Eats and paid a service fee. Further, the lawsuit alleges Uber One members, who are supposed to enjoy benefits such as no delivery fees on eligible orders, have been paying the service fee. It's 'really a delivery fee as it only applies to delivery orders' and it 'constitutes a breach of contract and negates the advertised benefit of the subscription.' Robb says 'the existence of parallel proceedings in these cases is not necessarily surprising or unusual.' He explains that the Competition Bureau has a statutory mandate to protect Canadian consumers and businesses from allegedly unfair business practices. In its case against DoorDash , it is asking the Competition Tribunal to provide restitution to consumers, though that's somewhat unusual, he says. 'It may or may not be equipped to negotiate and deliver remedies to consumers.' However, he points out that class actions always focus on recovery for consumers, 'even when the amounts are individually minimal. It is common in our cases that when they resolve, an administration mechanism is established to facilitate an accessible distribution of modest amount to individual consumers.' A recent example would be a payout website established for the bread-fixing class-action settlement. Our website is the place for the latest breaking news, exclusive scoops, longreads and provocative commentary. Please bookmark and sign up for our daily newsletter, Posted, here .
