In re Novo Nordisk Sec. Litig.
HLLI represented an objector challenging the fairness of a class action settlement that pays a third of the $100 million gross settlement fund to attorneys, instead of the customary 25%.
HLLI represented an objector challenging the fairness of a class action settlement that pays a third of the $100 million gross settlement fund to attorneys, instead of the customary 25%.
HLLI filed an amicus brief on behalf of counties in Utah and Colorado in support of a motion by Louisiana and twelve other States seeking to preliminarily enjoin the federal government's unlawful moratorium on oil and gas leasing on federal lands and offshore waters. The Fifth Circuit agreed with HLLI.
HLLI successfully represented a chocolate consumer who objected to a largely-illusory settlement involving Godiva Chocolatier. The settlement would have paid class members like Lehrer conditionally at most $7 million. In contrast, plaintiffs' attorneys negotiated a fixed $5 million fund earmarked for their own fees.
Law360 covered the First Circuit's decision upholding sanctions against Class Counsel Firm Lieff Cabraser in the State Street case.
Kelly House at Bridge Michigan covered the decision awarding fees in the In re: Flint Water Cases case and quotes HLLI attorney Frank Bednarz on the award.
HLLI submitted a comment letter asking the Department of Labor’s Employee Benefits Security Administration to withdraw its proposed rule revising 29 CFR § 2550.404a-1, Investment Duties.
Theodore H. Frank filed an objection to a class action settlement over a data breach of Wawa customer data, which would pay attorneys more than the class members they represent.
The settling attorneys argue they should be paid 38% of the $181 million settlement fund as fees and costs, which is nearly triple the percentage typically awarded in a settlement of this size. The fee request is also more than twice what one of the lead firms has bid as a percentage fee award in two other antitrust cases.
HLLI filed an amicus brief for Pinnacle Peak Pictures in support of the First Amendment free association rights of Miss USA. The Ninth Circuit agreed with the amicus that the First Amendment guarantees the right to produce content consistent with their beliefs.
HLLI, joining with the Cato Institute, filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to grant review of a case where the lower court would compel a web designer to create sites conveying messages that she opposes, and did so by creating a troubling “monopoly” rationale that has no support in First Amendment law or reality.