Bryson Class Action Lawsuit: Settlements and Mass Arbitrations

Bryson class action lawsuits are handled by Bryson Harris Suciu & DeMay PLLC, a national plaintiffs’ firm that launched on October 1, 2025 and represents consumers, property owners, and workers in class actions, mass arbitrations, and other complex litigation.¹ The firm employs 36 attorneys across offices in Raleigh, Miami, St. Petersburg, Bloomfield Hills, San Diego, New Orleans, and New York City, and has already secured settlements ranging from a $108 million judgment against the City of Charlotte to a $68.5 million recovery against Instagram’s parent company.²

The Firm’s Largest Settlements

City of Charlotte Development Fees — $108 Million

The firm’s largest reported settlement came in Daedalus, LLC v. City of Charlotte, which it describes as the largest class action settlement in North Carolina state court history.² The case alleged that Charlotte coerced property owners and developers into paying water and sewer impact fees by threatening to withhold building permits and other approvals. It built on two North Carolina Supreme Court rulings in Quality Built Homes, Inc. v. Town of Carthage in 2016 and 2018, which had declared similar fees illegal.³

Thousands of property owners and developers in Charlotte and Mecklenburg County received refunds plus interest under the settlement. The litigation also contributed to passage of North Carolina’s Public Water and Sewer System Development Fee Act, which set new legal standards for how municipalities may charge such fees.³

Instagram Biometric Privacy — $68.5 Million

The firm served as counsel in a class action alleging that Instagram’s facial recognition technology collected users’ biometric data without consent, in violation of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act. Meta agreed to pay $68.5 million on behalf of a class of 4.8 million members, and Instagram removed the facial recognition feature from its app.⁴

Other Reported Settlements

The firm’s attorneys have secured additional resolutions across consumer and product cases:

Snapchat: $35 million class action settlement involving a minor.⁵
Wardson Construction v. City of Raleigh: $24 million summary judgment award over development fees.⁵
True Homes v. Brunswick County: $15.25 million class action settlement over development-related fees.⁵
Generac PWRcell SnapRS: $15 million product liability settlement in the Eastern District of Wisconsin over allegations that SnapRS components in Generac solar systems were prone to overheating, melting, or failing. Preliminarily approved in January 2026, it provides cash payments and warranty changes to system owners, with a final approval hearing scheduled for October 21, 2026.⁶
Clay v. Cytosport: $12 million national class action in the Southern District of California alleging Muscle Milk ready-to-drink products contained about 10 percent less protein than advertised and were marketed as “lean” despite significant added fats.⁷
Gregorio v. Premier Nutrition: $9 million class action over the Premier Protein brand.⁵
In re: Beyond Meat: $7.5 million MDL settlement over protein content marketing claims.⁸

NCAA Pre-Enrollment Prize Money Case

Reese Brantmeier et al v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, filed in March 2024 in the Middle District of North Carolina, challenged NCAA rules that barred athletes from accepting prize money earned in non-NCAA events before enrolling in college. The complaint asserted antitrust claims under the Sherman Act on behalf of a North Carolina women’s tennis player and similarly situated student-athletes.⁹

Under the settlement, the NCAA agreed to pay $2.02 million in damages to Brantmeier and former Texas tennis player Maya Joint, plus over $2 million in attorneys’ fees and administrative costs. The NCAA also agreed to eliminate the restrictions on pre-enrollment prize money across all sports, a change the court said “will positively impact future generations of student-athletes.”⁹

Active Class Actions

The Nestlé Boost Glucose Control class action, filed in December 2021 in the Northern District of California, alleges that phrases like “Designed for people with diabetes” and “Helps manage blood sugar” on Boost Glucose Control labels falsely imply the drinks have a therapeutic effect. A federal judge denied Nestlé’s motion for summary judgment in April 2025, and two of the three named plaintiffs survived. The case was moving toward class certification briefing.¹⁰¹¹

A separate class action against Carteret County, North Carolina alleges the county improperly charged “green box” solid waste disposal fees to property owners who never used the sites or who paid for private collection. The North Carolina Supreme Court upheld a lower court decision allowing the case to proceed.¹² Jim DeMay also represents cities and public water systems in the national PFAS multidistrict litigation, In re: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation.¹³

As of June 2026, the firm had filed additional cases against Ermi LLC, Hometap Equity Partners, Root Technology Ltd (maker of Momcozy products), and Electrolux Consumer Products.⁵ The firm also has a growing digital privacy docket, including Video Privacy Protection Act cases against video game publishers like Electronic Arts, Take-Two Interactive, and Blizzard/Activision over alleged transmission of player data through Meta Pixels and embedded software development kits.¹⁴ Data breach and tracking matters involving Asheville Eye Associates, WakeMed Health, and BuzzFeed were on the docket as of early 2026.¹⁵

Mass Arbitration Campaigns Consumers Can Join

A growing share of the firm’s work involves mass arbitration rather than traditional class actions. Companies that embed mandatory arbitration clauses and class action waivers in their terms of service block consumers from banding together in court, so the firm organizes large numbers of individual arbitration claims instead. Intake runs through a branded subdomain on ClassAction.org.¹⁶

Sweepstakes and Social Casino Platforms

The firm is investigating and pursuing mass arbitrations against sites it alleges operate as illegal, unlicensed gambling enterprises disguised as play-for-fun or sweepstakes platforms. The legal theories draw on state anti-gambling laws, consumer protection statutes, and privacy rules. Named targets include SciPlay, DoubleDown, Stake.us, Huuuge Games, PrizePicks, and Polymarket, among others.¹⁷

Lyft Driver Misclassification

The firm is organizing individual arbitrations for Lyft drivers who allege the company misclassified them as independent contractors and denied them minimum wage, overtime, expense reimbursement, and benefits. The claims rest on the Fair Labor Standards Act and parallel state wage laws, with the argument that Lyft’s control over pay rates, performance monitoring, and ride assignment meets the legal standard for an employment relationship. As of May 2026, the firm was signing up drivers on a 40 percent contingency fee.¹⁸¹⁹

Online Retailer Privacy Investigations

The firm sponsors investigations into the data practices of online retailers including Kay Jewelers, Levi’s, Alo Yoga, Hot Topic, and Sprouts Farmers Market. The investigations allege unauthorized sharing of consumer data and are structured as potential mass arbitrations.²⁰

Who Runs the Firm

Bryson Harris Suciu & DeMay was founded by Daniel Bryson, Scott Harris, Nick Suciu III, Jim DeMay, and Karl Amelchenko, joined by former North Carolina Court of Appeals judges Martha Geer and Lucy Inman.¹ Daniel Bryson focuses on aggregating small-value consumer claims into class actions. Nick Suciu III leads many of the firm’s food and supplement labeling cases. Jim DeMay has served as lead or co-lead counsel in cases recovering over $250 million and played a central role in the North Carolina development fee litigation.¹³ Scott Harris works on the financial strategy of aggregating consumer claims, and Karl Amelchenko concentrates on data privacy litigation.² Five of the firm’s attorneys were featured in Super Lawyers as of March 2026.⁵

1
North Carolina Advocates for Justice. NCAJ Members Launch Bryson Harris Suciu DeMay PLLC
2
Attorney at Law Magazine. Bryson Harris Suciu DeMay
3
Bryson PLLC. Firm Wins $108M Class Action Against City of Charlotte
4
Bryson PLLC. Instagram Agrees to Pay $68.5 Million for Biometrics Breach
5
Bryson PLLC. Bryson Harris Suciu & DeMay PLLC
6
Generac SnapRS Settlement. In Re Generac Solar Power Systems Marketing Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation
7
Bryson PLLC. Muscle Milk Protein $12 Million Class Action
8
Bryson PLLC. Nick Suciu III
9
ESPN. NCAA Overhaul Policy Athletes Earning Money Pre-College
10
Courthouse News Service. False Advertisement Suit Over Nestle Glucose Drink Likely to Survive
11
CCH. In Re Nestlé Boost Nutritional Drink Litigation
12
Bryson PLLC. Solid Waste Fees Class Action
13
Bryson PLLC. Jim DeMay
14
Bryson PLLC. Video Game Privacy Violations (VPPA)
15
Bryson PLLC. Our Cases
16
ClassAction.org. Welcome From ClassAction.org – LA Times
17
ClassAction.org. Online Gambling Class Action Lawsuit Alternatives
18
ClassAction.org. Lyft Independent Contractors Lawsuits
19
Bryson ClassAction.org. Lyft Benefits
20
ClassAction.org. Online Shopping Investigations Lawsuits