"Cy pres-only settlement arrangements embody the worst flaws of the class action settlement system and are notable in their disservice to consumers," said the coalition, which is led by Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich. "In cy pres-only deals, defendants and class counsel secure their own goals from the litigation while bypassing the class."
“All you need to do is punish the attorneys that are overbilling in a few of these cases,” Frank says, adding that disciplinary sanctions need to be on the table for there to be a true deterrent.
Ted Frank of the Center for Class Action Fairness is going to make history at the U.S. Supreme Court next term in Frank v. Gaos.
Law360 covers CCAF's Supreme Court case Frank v. Gaos.
Mealy's covers CCAF's Supreme Court case Frank v. Gaos.
Today the Center for Class Action Fairness filed its opening brief in Frank v. Gaos, a case before the U.S. Supreme Court challenging a class action settlement that provided zero dollars to class members, more than $2 million to the lawyers, and the remaining $5.3 million to third-party organizations unrelated to the case. Those organizations include class counsel’s alma maters and nonprofits to which defendant Google already contributes. This unfair practice of giving away class members’ money…
Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit agreed to allow the Center for Class Action Fairness go back to court and challenge the actions of professional, bad-faith objectors.
This week, Judge Jed Rakoff of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York agreed with the Center for Class Action Fairness objection to the excessive attorneys’ fees request in the $3 billion class action settlement, In re Petrobras Securities Litigation.
Wednesday’s hearing is likely to expose “substantial shenanigans,” said class action activist Ted Frank.
‘Gobsmacking’ Fee Request: Haynes also challenges class counsel’s request of $284.5 million, 9.5 percent of the settlement’s value, in attorneys’ fees. He called the request ‘‘gobsmacking,’’ saying it will further dilute class recovery and ‘‘is based on the brazen overbilling of contract attorneys to the tune of nearly $100 million.’’
