A New Day Dawning

Two and a half years is a long time to remain silent. But that is what I have done. The Kimkins case has long since come and gone through the court system. Of course, "Kimmer" still runs free and wild as ever. I have come to the conclusion that even though the good guys won, it wasn't enough. Our system is broken, sadly. 

But today, the second day of a new year, my focus is far from the Kimkins case. My life is almost unrecognizable from what it was during the case. And that is what longs for the light of truth now. Writing ... the most therapeutic exercise I know. I am ready to heal, and to tell my story. Today a new day is dawning. 

I am ready to discover who I am.

Notice of Class Action

Here is the content of the Notice of Class Action Judgement against Heidi Diaz and Kimkins. IF YOU ARE A MEMBER OF THE CLASS YOU NEED TO READ THIS AND FOLLOW THESE INSTRUCTIONS.

A PDF copy of the Judge's decision and order against HEIDI DIAZ and KIMKINS is available. I will send it to anyone/everyone who requests one.




John E. Tiedt [State Bar No. 134667]
Marc S. Hurd [State Bar No. 130667
TIEDT & HURD
980 Montecito Drive, Suite 209
Corona, California 92879
Telephone: (951) 549-9400
Facsimile: (951) 549-9800

Michael Lee Cohen (SBN 206253)
MICHAEL L. COHEN,
Cohen McKeon, LLP
1910 West Sunset Blvd., #440
Los Angeles, CA 90026
Telephone: (213) 413-6400
Facsimile: (213) 403-6405

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, RIVERSIDE COURT

JEANESSA FENDERSON; TRISTA ESSEX; KATHLEEN ROGERS; DIANA SHERBY; ANN MARIE WOOD; NANCY MCGREGOR, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

HEIDI DIAZ; KIMKINS, an unknown business entity, and DOES 4 through 100, Inclusive,

Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
) Case No. RIC 483005

CLASS ACTION

NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION JUDGMENT



[Assigned to Judge Mark E. Johnson, Dept. 5]
Action Filed: October 15, 2007
Trial Date: October 25, 2010

A STATE COURT AUTHORIZED THIS NOTICE. YOU HAVE NOT BEEN SUED.

YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS NOTICE BECAUSE YOU MIGHT BE ENTITLED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE RECOVERY FROM A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT AGAINST HEIDI DIAZ AND THE WEB SITE KIMKINS.COM.

THE PURPOSE OF THIS NOTICE IS TO PROVIDE YOU WITH INFORMATION REGARDING THE COURT’S JUDGMENT IN JEANESSA FENDERSON, ET AL. V. HEIDI DIAZ, ET AL, CASE NO. RIC 483005, IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA.

YOU MUST ACT PROMPTLY IF YOU WISH TO RECEIVE ANY PORTION OF THIS JUDGMENT.

PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY.

THE CONTENTS OF THIS NOTICE

WHY SHOULD I READ THIS NOTICE?

The purpose of this notice is to provide you with information regarding the Court’s judgment in Jeanessa Fenderson, et al. v. Heidi Diaz, et al, Case No. RIC 483005, in the Superior Court of the State of California, Riverside County, California. This notice also will provide you with the information you need to determine whether you are a member of the class and to obtain your share of the recovery as a member of the class.

WHY AM I GETTING THIS NOTICE?

You are receiving this notice because you might be a member of the class—that is, someone who purchased a Kimkins.com diet membership on-line from the Kimkins.com Web site from January 1, 2006 through October 15, 2007.

WHAT WAS THIS CASE ABOUT?

This lawsuit was based on the plaintiffs’ claims that Heidi Diaz and her Web site, www.kimkins.com, used unfair, unlawful, or fraudulent business practices to fool them into buying memberships to Kimkins.com. This lawsuit also was based on the plaintiffs’ claims that the false and misleading information contained on the kimkins.com Website constituted fraud or negligent misrepresentation by Diaz and the other defendants.

WHAT IS A “CLASS ACTION”?

A class action is a special type of lawsuit in which one person or a few people bring suit for all members of a similarly situated group to recover money for all members of the group, without each member of the group having to file his or her own lawsuit or appearing in the court. A class member is a person who participates in the class action and will be bound by any judgment or settlement in the case. Class actions may be used by courts when the legal claims and evidence appear to raise issues of law or fact that are common to all members of the class, this making it fair to apply any order, settlement, or judgment in the case to all class members.

WHO WAS INCLUDED IN THE CLASS?

In an order dated May 20, 2009, the Court granted the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification. The Court certified for class treatment the plaintiffs’ claims for equitable relief, including disgorgement of the subscription fees paid to Diaz and www.kimkins.com by the plaintiffs and the members of the class. The Court defined the class as all individuals who purchased the Kimkins.com diet membership on-line from the Kimkins.com Web site from January 1, 2006 through October 15, 2007.



WHAT HAPPENED AT TRIAL?

In late October 2010, the Court held a trial. After hearing and reading evidence presented by both sides, the Court concluded that the defendants had committed unfair, unlawful, and fraudulent acts in violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law, Business and Professions Code § 17200. The Court also concluded that the defendants had engaged in acts of negligent misrepresentation and fraud.

WHAT WAS THE COURT’S JUDGMENT?

On December 17, 2010, the Court entered judgment in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendants. The Court ordered the defendants to post a notice on www.kimkins.com warning members and potential members that Diaz had used fraudulent and deceptive advertising to sell memberships for her diet plans and diet support system. The Court ordered the defendants to pay restitution to members of the class in the amount of $1,824,210.39, less any amount for memberships paid by members who previously had acted to opt out of the class. The Court also ordered the defendants to pay punitive damages in the amount of $500,000.

WHAT IF I WANT TO READ A COPY OF THE JUDGMENT FOR MYSELF?

You can read a copy of the judgment at Kimkins.com
Kimkinsblog.com
Kimkinslawsuit.com
Kimkinsscam.wordpress.com
Kimkinscontroversy.com
Kimkindangers.blogspot.com
Lowcarbfriends.com
Livinlavidalocarb.com
Kimkinsexposed2.wordpress.com
Saynotokimkins.wordpress.com
Kimkinssurvivors.wordpress.com
Tiedtlaw.com
prudentiablog.blogspot.com
affiliatescams.wurdmess.com
simpledietchoices.com
amyb1569.wordpress.com
kimkinsclassactionlawsuit.blogspot.com
mariasol-mariasol.blogspot.com
kimkinsdiettruth. blogspot.com
2medusa.com
kimkinsdiettruth.wordpress.com
kimkinsdangers.blogspot.com
honeybeesblog.wordpress.com
kimkinsnightmares.blogspot.com
stumblingtobethlehem.blogspot.com
kimtanicwordpress.com
kimorexia.blogspot.com
notmakingnicetokimkins.blogspot.com
thekimkinslie.blogspot.com
livinlocarbandlovinit.blogspot.com
apinchofhealth.com
pinchof.blogspot.com
cindysIowcarblife.blogspot.com
weight-in.blogspot.com
mayberryfan.blogspot.com
dietwhoas. blogspot.com
weighingthefactsblogspot.com
magicsmomsmusings.blogspot.com
the-journey-on.blogspot.com
wifezillasway.blogspot.com
sockittome.info
mariasols.com
campcarbaway.com
eatinglow.com
atkinsdietbuIletinboard.com
examiner.com
helpfindthemissin.org.

WHAT RIGHTS DO I HAVE?

If you purchased a Kimkins.com diet membership on-line from the Kimkins.com Website between January 1, 2006 and October 15, 2007, you may send in a claim for your pro-rated share of the proceeds that the attorneys are able to collect from the defendants. Since we do not yet know how much money the plaintiffs’ attorneys will be able to collect from the defendants, we cannot know at this time how much each member of the class will recover.

If you wish to receive your pro-rated share of these proceeds, you must send in a signed copy of the form provided at the end of this notice. You must send it to the following address:

Mr. John E. Tiedt
Tiedt & Hurd
980 Montecito Drive, Suite 209
Corona, California 92879

To be eligible to receive your share of the recovery, the envelope with your signed form must be postmarked no later than midnight on November 7, 2011. So we urge you to act promptly.

HOW DO THE ATTORNEYS GET PAID? AND WHO PAYS THE COSTS FOR THIS LAWSUIT?

Class counsel—John E. Tiedt, Michael L. Cohen, and Ray Moore—represented the plaintiffs and the class members on a contingency-fee basis. After they have recovered what money they can from the defendants, they will file a request with the court for attorney fees and for reimbursement of the costs that they paid in bringing this lawsuit. The Court then will decide how much to pay them for their fees and how much they will be reimbursed for costs.



WHAT HAPPENS IF THERE IS ANY MONEY LEFT OVER?

By order of the Court, any money recovered that is not paid out to class members, to attorneys for fees, or to reimburse the attorneys for costs will be distributed to the Health Fraud Task Force of California.

WHAT IF I NEED MORE INFORMATION?

If you need more information, you should take one or both of the following steps:

• Review the documents in the Court’s file for this lawsuit. Many of these documents may be viewed or obtained on-line at the following URL: http://public-access.riverside.courts.ca.gov/OpenAccess/. You also may review the Court’s file in person by going to the Office of the Clerk of the Court for the Riverside Superior Court, during regular business hours. The Clerk’s office is located at 4050 Main Street, Riverside, California 92501.

• Write a letter to the attorneys who are representing the plaintiffs and whom the Court has appointed to represent the class. Here are their names and their contact information:

John E. Tiedt
Tiedt & Hurd
980 Montecito Drive, Suite 209
Corona, California 92879

Michael L. Cohen
Michael L. Cohen, a PLC
1910 West Sunset Blvd., #440
Los Angeles, California 90026

If you decide to contact one of the plaintiffs’ attorneys, please do so in writing. To make it easier for them or one of their staff members to respond, however, your letter should include both your e-mail address and your telephone number.

There are estimated to be as many as 40,000 members in the class. So please, DO NOT CALL THE COURT OR ATTEMPT TO CONTACT THE COURT BY E-MAIL.

Official Notice of Pendency of Class Notice

Here is the notice that has now been approved by the Court. I will post a copy of the notice including the Judge's signature as soon as it is provided to me.

Please pass this on - forward it to every party you might think remotely interested, including media outlets you think may have an interest in sharing this information. If you are familiar with anyone who joined Kimkins, please direct them to this notice so that as many of the 40,000 people affected by Heidi's little scam as possible will have the opportunity to know they are part of the class and can opt out, preferring instead to allow Heidi to keep their money, or, perhaps, retaining their right to sue her independently.

If you previously posted this on your blog, please replace the pending version with this official one. Thank you!

Hear that banging sound? Just another handful of nails ...

NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION

TO: EVERYONE WHO PURCHASED A MEMBERSHIP TO KIMKINS.COM THROUGH THE KIMKINS.COM WEB SITE (www.kimkins.com) FROM JANUARY 1, 2006 TO OCTOBER 15, 2007

PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY. YOUR RIGHTS MAY BE AFFECTED BY A CLASS-ACTION LAWSUIT THAT IS CURRENTLY PENDING IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT, IN RIVERSIDE, CALILFORNIA.

INTRODUCTION

1. On May 20, 2009, the Riverside County Superior Court, located in Riverside, California, issued an order certifying this case to proceed as a class action.

2. The plaintiffs are six individuals who bought memberships to kimkins.com through the kimkins.com Website (www.kimkins.com) from January 1, 2006 to October 15, 2007. The defendants are Heidi Diaz, an individual, and Kimkins (also known as Kimkins.com), a business entity that conducts business in Corona, California.

3. The plaintiffs contend that Diaz and Kimkins.com induced them into buying memberships for kimkins.com through false and misleading information provided on the Kimkins.com Web site. The plaintiffs contend that the defendants violated California Business & Professions Code § 17200, et seq., which authorizes courts to provide relief from unfair, unlawful, and fraudulent business practices. The plaintiffs also contend that Diaz and Kimkins.com violated common law prohibitions against fraud and negligent misrepresentation.

4. This notice provides you with information regarding the litigation, including the plaintiffs’ claims against the defendants and the current status of the litigation. This notice also provides you with information regarding the court’s class-certification order.

THE LITIGATION

The Plaintiffs’ Claims

5. This lawsuit is based on the plaintiffs’ claims that Diaz and Kimkins used unfair, unlawful, or fraudulent business practices to induce them into buying memberships to Kimkins.com. This lawsuit is also based on the plaintiffs’ claims that the false and misleading information contained on the kimkins.com Web site constituted fraud or negligent misrepresentation by Diaz and Kimkins.

6. Here’s a list of the kinds of misconduct that the plaintiffs have alleged:

• that Diaz and Kimkins concocted a false persona, “Kim Drake” or “Kimmer” to sell memberships to Kimkins.com
• that Diaz and Kimkins misled potential members into believing that “Kim Drake” was real by using photos of real women and then falsely claiming that the photos depicted “Drake”
• that Diaz and Kimkins posted lied about “Drake’s” purported weight loss
• that Diaz and Kimkins provided false or misleading information to Women’s World magazine
• that Diaz and Kimkins fabricated 41 “success stories” and published on the Kimkins.com Web
• that Diaz and Kimkins made up celebrity endorsements
• that Diaz and Kimkins misused labels and metatags to steer Internet traffic to the Kimkins.com Website, in violation of the law
• that Diaz and Kimkins misled potential members into believing that they were buying lifetime memberships, when in fact Diaz and Kimkins.com terminated memberships at their whim
• that Diaz and Kimkins intended to mislead potential members and assumed that potential members would rely on her misrepresentations.

The Defendants’ Position

7. Diaz and Kimkins have denied all allegations of wrongdoing and liability, and they continue to deny that they have done anything wrong. Diaz and Kimkins also have asserted various affirmative defenses to the plaintiffs’ claims.

THE COURT’S CLASS-CERTIFICATION ORDER

8. In an order filed May 20, 2009, the Court granted the Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification. The Court certified for class treatment the plaintiffs’ claims for equitable relief, including disgorgement of the subscription fees paid to Diaz and Kimkins by the plaintiffs and the members of the class.

9. The certified class is defined as all individuals who purchased the Kimkins.com diet membership on-line from the Kimkins.com Web site from January 1, 2006 through October 15, 2007.

THE COURT HAS NOT EXPRESSED ANY OPINIONS
REGARDING THE MERITS OF THE PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS

10. The Court ordered that this notice be provided to advise class members that this case is pending and that the Court has certified the case to proceed as a class action. You should not consider this notice or its mailing to be a statement by the Court that the plaintiffs are right or that their claims will prevail.

INSTRUCTIONS TO CLASS MEMBERS

11. You do not need to do anything to remain a member of the class. If you bought a Kimkins.com diet membership on-line from the Kimkins.com Web site from January 1, 2006 through October 15, 2007—including either of those dates—you are automatically included in the class. Your rights will be represented by the plaintiffs and their attorneys. You will not be personally responsible for any attorney fees or for the any of the costs of this litigation.

OPT OUT OF CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT

12. You have the opportunity to opt out of the class action lawsuit as detailed herein. If you incurred a personal injury as a result of using the Kimkins.com aka Kimkins Diet, you have a right to opt out. Notices to opt must be sent to jtiedt@tiedtlaw.com or mailed to Tiedt & Hurd at 980 Montecito Drive, Suite 209, Corona, California 92879.

WHERE TO GO & WHOM TO CONTACT
SHOULD YOU NEED MORE INFORMATION

13. This notice provides only a brief summary of this litigation. For further details, you should take one or both of the following steps:

• Review the documents in the Court’s file for this lawsuit. Many of these documents may be viewed or obtained on-line at the following URL: http://public-access.riverside.courts.ca.gov/OpenAccess/ . You also may review the Court’s file in person by going to the Office of the Clerk of the Court for the Riverside Superior Court, during regular business hours. The Clerk’s office is located at 4050 Main Street, Riverside, California 92501.

• Write a letter to the attorneys who are representing the plaintiffs and whom the Court has appointed to represent the class. Here are their names and their contact information:

John E. Tiedt & Marc S. Hurd
Tiedt & Hurd
980 Montecito Drive, Suite 209
Corona, California 92879

Michael L. Cohen
Michael L. Cohen, a PLC
707 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 4100
Los Angeles, California 90017

Ray Moore
Moore Winter McLennan LLP
701 N. Brand Blvd., Suite 200
Glendale, California 92103-4232

If you decide to contact one of the plaintiffs’ attorneys, please do so in writing. To make it easier for them or one of their staff members to respond, however, your letter should include both your e-mail address and your telephone number.

There are estimated to be as many as 40,000 members in the class. So please, DO NOT CALL THE COURT OR ATTEMPT TO CONTACT THE COURT BY E-MAIL.


DATE: ___________________________, 2009


____________________________________
Hon. _________________________,
Presiding Judge