The big one: A major lawsuit filed in federal court in California against Wal-Mart over the company’s controversial sales tactics and the use of a predatory advertising program is likely to be one of the biggest legal battles in US consumer history.
But Wal-mart’s chief financial officer, Ken Fields, has said the case is just a preliminary examination of the claims in the lawsuit.
The company’s lawsuit seeks $1 billion in damages from the company, claiming that it misled customers and misled the federal government into believing that Wal-Marts stores were safer than they actually were.
The plaintiffs include Wal- Mart’s chief executive officer and his top executives and several top lawyers from across the nation.
“These allegations are very serious,” Fields said in an interview with CBS News.
“This is not a frivolous case.
These are serious allegations.”
Fields also said the lawsuit will likely be filed this week in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, which covers Los Angeles and San Diego counties.
He said the legal case is not about Wal-marts, or the fact that there are two different legal claims against it.
It’s about the whole culture and culture of this company.
The complaint, which is the largest in US legal history, alleges that Walmarts stores have been more dangerous and more dangerous to the health of people who shopped there than in any other retailer.
It also alleges that the company and its top executives, including President Tim Hildebrandt and Chief Operating Officer Mark Wiedefeld, violated federal law by failing to adequately inform customers and workers of the risks posed by their use of the program.
“We will vigorously defend this lawsuit,” Fields told CBS News in an exclusive interview.
“I think there’s no question that WalMart is being sued over the safety of its stores,” he added.
“The safety of the stores is of the utmost importance to us.”
A lawsuit filed by a group of workers at the Wal- mart store in New York City, where Wal-mans store security team was filmed selling drugs to customers and employees.
The suit alleges that workers at Wal- marts stores in New England and Pennsylvania had to undergo medical examinations after being exposed to dangerous chemicals, including chemicals that are used to make plastics.
A lawsuit by the National Restaurant Association against Walmart.
Wal-mart has denied the allegations and said that the store security program is “standard operating procedure” in its stores.
The lawsuit has also called for an investigation into how the program was implemented and the role of its own lawyers.
Fields has defended the program as an important safety measure and said Wal- mans is one of only a few companies that still has such a program.
He told CBS that the program, which has been in place since 2005, is being implemented in an attempt to make sure the company doesn’t have to use it again.
“There is no doubt that our employees have been trained to go into a Wal- store and perform a security check.
I mean, they do that every day.
That’s the standard operating procedure,” he said.
“So we’re in compliance with the law.”
The Wal- merts lawsuit is the second lawsuit filed against the company in California this year.
The state’s attorney general has asked a federal judge to rule that Walmart has the right to sue the company over allegations that it did not adequately protect employees from dangerous chemicals in its facilities.
Walmarts lawsuit is likely the first legal action against the Walmashes’ former chief executive, which began in 2013 when a former Wal- marster security guard, Daniel Smith, died in the store.
The lawsuit claims that Smith, who was not an employee of the company at the time of his death, was forced to sell his car and quit his job at the company when he began to suspect that Walmes security team may have been involved in selling drugs.
Walmart said in a statement that the lawsuit is “without merit and without merit a lawsuit filed under the false pretense that it seeks to make a political statement or to settle personal scores.
The suit is an attempt by a small number of disgruntled former employees to use frivolous litigation as a pretext to gain political power.”