The Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute represents an objector to the settlement of McKinney-Drobnis v. Massage Envy Franchising LLC, which provides only coupons to class members, including those who no longer subscribe to Massage Envy, while earmarking $3.3 million for attorneys' fees in cash.
The Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute successfully represented an objector in Stericycle Securities Litigation, where all of the attorneys are supporters of Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood, who has sole control over one of the named plaintiffs. The Seventh Circuit vacated the fee award on appeal, and plaintiffs’ counsel agreed with HLLI to reduce their excessive fee request, to avoid further litigation.
In the original settlement with Lenny & Larry’s, the DOJ estimated only $350,000 in cash went to the class members, and suggested that fees should be in the range of $228,000 to $463,000. The government was particularly critical of a provision that gave potentially $3.15 million in free cookies to General Nutrition Centers Inc. and The Vitamin Shoppe in the event that not enough class members make claims.
Class member and CCAF director Ted Frank successfully objected to the settlement of Cowen v. Lenny & Larry’s, Inc., which would have provided class members at most $350,000 but paid attorneys $1.2 million in hard cash—not cookies.
In 2013, Chief Justice John Roberts wrote an unusual statement concurring with the Court’s denial of review in another privacy case. Justice Roberts opined that the Supreme Court should “address more fundamental concerns surrounding the use of [cy pres] remedies in class action litigation, including when, if ever, such relief should be considered.”
“I would never have appointed you…had I known you were going to pile on 53 law firms on this case,” Judge Lucy Koh of the Northern District of California reportedly told class counsel Thursday in the data privacy settlement of In re Anthem, Inc. Data Breach Litigation. Judge Koh agreed with a motion filed by the Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute’s Center for Class Action Fairness that a special master should be appointed to investigate…
Last week, CEI’s Center for Class Action Fairness’ (CCAF) Anna St. John objected to an unfair class action settlement in Campbell v. Facebook. This case was centered around the theory that Facebook illegally analyzed URLs that users sent over private messages. CCAF has taken on some egregious settlements, but this one is especially ridiculous. Here are seven reasons why: CCAF found out and objected to…
This blog post was published when the Center for Class Action Fairness was a project of the Competitive Enterprise Institute. The Center for Class Action Fairness (CCAF) has long opposed abusive “cy pres” settlements that benefit third-party beneficiaries instead of compensating class members; Ted Frank wrote about the issue in 2008 before founding CCAF, and Ted Frank has testified to Congress concerning cy pres settlements. As Reuters reporter Alison Frankel wrote after CCAF’s win in the Eighth…
Earlier this week the Center for Class Action Fairness filed a motion to intervene and seek disgorgement from for-profit “professional objectors” in Pearson v. NBTY, Inc., a case dealing with allegedly deceptive marketing practices by makers of health supplements. The Center became involved in the case in 2014 when it objected to a class action settlement that would have provided attorneys $4.5 million but less than $900,000 to the class. On appeal, the Seventh Circuit agreed and reversed approval of the…
