CCAF Applauds Reduction in Attorneys’ Fees in Polyurethane Foam Antitrust Settlement
The court order means that consumers will receive $9 million more than they would have under class counsel’s original request.
CCAF Identifies Problems with Cy Pres Awards in Google Settlement
Today, the Center for Class Action Fairness (CCAF) filed a reply brief in the Gaos v. Google settlement appeal to the Ninth Circuit. In the original case plaintiffs’ lawyers sued Google for statutory damages for alleged federal privacy violations by their search engine. The settlement established an $8.5 million fund, none of which went to the class members affected by the privacy violations. Instead, the settlement fees were split between the plaintiffs’ lawyers –…
Podcast: When Enough is not Enough: Frank v. Poertner
Ted Frank speaks to the Federalist Society Litigation Practice Group Podcast regarding his cert petition with the Supreme Court in Frank v. Poertner.
Amicus Brief: In Re Volkswagen “Clean Diesel” Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation
The Center for Class Action Fairness recommends the court select lead plaintiffs’ counsel through a competitive bidding process among the dozens of attorneys expected to apply.
Subway Footlong Sandwich Marketing And Sales Practices Litigation
In a victory for consumers, the Center for Class Action Fairness successfully objected to an abusive class action settlement in a case about the length of Subway’s “footlong” sandwiches. The proposed settlement benefitted only nine people in the class but awarded more than half a million dollars to the class attorneys.
CCAF Challenges Duracell Battery Class Action Settlement, Files Cert Petition Before U.S. Supreme Court
Today, the CCAF filed a cert petition before the U.S. Supreme Court asking for review of a class action lawsuit settlement in Poertner v. The Gillette Co. The original case centered on a lawsuit over dubious advertising claims made about Duracell batteries. Class counsel structured a settlement that paid themselves $5.7 million, paid a small fraction of class members a total of $344,850, and left over 99 percent of the class with nothing.
CCAF Objects to Egregious 30% Fee Grab by Counsel in Polyurethane Class Suit Settlement
CCAF attorney Anna St. John said, “If awarded in full, the excessive fee requested by class counsel would transfer to plaintiffs’ attorneys tens of millions of dollars that rightfully belong to class members. It’s an all-too-common example of attorneys purporting to represent consumers harmed by unlawful business practices, when in reality these attorneys try to harm those same consumers again by seeking far more than they are entitled to by law.”
Polyurethane Foam Antitrust Litigation
Class counsel sought 30% in fees -- over $45 million -- from the $150 million mega-fund and justifies the request with a lodestar that is both inadequately supported and based on numerous forms of over-billing. The district court reduced the excessive fee request by $9 million.
Walgreen Co. Stockholder Litigation
CCAF challenged strike suit that provided meaningless disclosures, prompting Seventh Circuit to adopt “plainly material” standard in order to approve such settlements. “Strike suits affect over 97 percent of mergers, costing businesses millions. We hope other courts follow Delaware and the Seventh Circuit in taking steps to shut down this racket.”
Amicus Brief: Volkswagen “Clean Diesel” Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation
CCAF is concerned the Judicial Panel will not consider judicial track records in scrutinizing the fairness of settlements when deciding who to transfer the case to.
_%E2%80%93_Frontansicht,_1._Juni_2013,_Ratingen.jpg){kind=link}
- Go to the previous page
- 1
- …
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- …
- 39
- Go to the next page