Limestone Bank customers who were charged certain account-related fees between May 3, 2013, and April 30, 2023 may be covered by a proposed $3.5 million class action settlement. Cases like this typically arise when banks apply deposit-account fees—often tied to overdrafts, returned items, or transaction posting practices—in ways customers say were not clearly disclosed or were assessed more often than they reasonably expected. For consumers, these fees can add up quickly, and for banks they are a major revenue category, which is why disputes over how fees are triggered, calculated, and described routinely become high-stakes litigation. The lawsuit was filed to challenge whether Limestone Bank’s fee practices and disclosures complied with the account agreement and applicable consumer-protection standards, with plaintiffs alleging improper charges and the bank denying wrongdoing while agreeing to settle to avoid the cost and risk of continued litigation. Its significance is twofold: it offers potential compensation to affected accountholders without requiring individual proof (“N/A” listed for proof required) and it underscores the legal scrutiny banks face when fee programs are perceived as unfair, confusing, or inconsistently applied. More broadly, similar class actions across the banking industry have targeted overdraft and NSF-related fees, “authorized positive, settled negative” scenarios, and other posting-order or repeat-fee patterns, all occurring against a regulatory backdrop that includes federal oversight of deposit-account marketing and disclosures, state consumer-protection laws, and heightened attention from banking regulators to so-called “junk fees” and unfair or deceptive practices in consumer financial products.