Visa 2007 Annual Report Download - page 63

Table of Contents
submit their claims. The court issued its final judgment on October 31, 2003. Visa U.S.A. and Visa International appealed the judgment. The final judgment
and restitution process were stayed pending this appeal. On August 6, 2004, the court awarded plaintiffs attorneys' fees in the amount of $28.2 million, half to
be paid by MasterCard and half by Visa U.S.A. and Visa International. Visa U.S.A. and Visa International subsequently filed a notice of appeal on the
attorneys' fee award. In February 2005, Visa U.S.A. and Visa International filed additional appellate briefing regarding the applicability of Proposition 64,
which amended sections of California's Unfair Competition Law dealing with standing to bring claims on behalf of others, to this action. On September 28,
2005, the appellate court reversed the trial court, finding that the plaintiff lacked standing to pursue the action in light of Proposition 64. Plaintiff filed a
petition for review with the California Supreme Court on November 7, 2005, which was granted on December 14, 2005.
On July 20, 2006, the parties entered into the settlement agreement discussed below under "The Currency Conversion Settlement Agreements." On
March 21, 2007, the California Supreme Court dismissed plaintiffs' petition for review of the Court of Appeal decision reversing the trial court's judgment in
favor of plaintiff. On March 22, 2007, the California Court of Appeal remanded the action to the trial court. On April 30, 2007, the California Court of Appeal
dismissed the appeal and cross-appeals of the trial court's award of attorneys' fees in this matter, and remanded these matters to the trial court. On May 8,
2007, the trial court dismissed the Schwartz action in its entirety without prejudice.
The Shrieve Action
Visa U.S.A., Visa International and MasterCard are defendants in a putative nationwide class action (statewide as to MasterCard) in California state
court, Shrieve v. Visa U.S.A. Inc., et al., Superior Court for the State of California, Alameda County, Case No. RG04155097, which we refer to as the Shrieve
Action. Plaintiffs allege that defendants impose a "hidden transaction fee" of 1% on debit card transactions and ATM withdrawals in foreign countries, and
that defendants therefore violated California's Unfair Competition Law. Visa U.S.A. and Visa International deny the allegations in plaintiffs' complaint.
Following the passage of Proposition 64, which limited standing to bring Unfair Competition Law claims, Visa U.S.A. and Visa International moved
for judgment on the pleadings. The court denied this motion. In January 2006, Visa U.S.A. and Visa International filed a writ petition with the court of Appeal
seeking review of this denial. In February 2006, plaintiffs moved in the trial court for certification of their action as a class. Defendants have opposed this
motion. While this writ petition and motion were pending, plaintiffs entered into the settlement agreement discussed below under "—The Currency
Conversion Settlement Agreements," and further consideration of this action has been deferred until after the March 31, 2008 Final Fairness Hearing.
The Mattingly Action
Visa U.S.A., Visa International and MasterCard are defendants in a putative nationwide class action (statewide as to MasterCard), Mattingly v. Visa
U.S.A. Inc., et al., Superior Court for the State of California, Alameda County, Case No. RG05198142, the Mattingly Action. Plaintiffs allege that defendants
impose a "hidden transaction fee" of 1% on credit card transactions in foreign countries, and that defendants therefore violated California's Unfair
Competition Law. Visa U.S.A. and Visa International deny the allegations in plaintiffs' complaint.
In January 2006, plaintiffs moved to amend their complaint to change the start of their putative class period to February 14, 2001 instead of October 23,
2002. While this motion was pending, the parties entered into the MDL Settlement Agreement, and further consideration of this action has been deferred until
after the March 31, 2008 Final Fairness Hearing discussed below under "—The Currency Conversion Settlement Agreements."
62