The Washington Free Beacon covered the Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute's case, Faoro v. Jewish Voice for Peace Inc., et al. in which an attorney representing one of the anti-Israel activists cited fictitious case law, suggesting the document was written by an AI chatbot like ChatGPT.
Reuters wrote about HLLI's objection in Corrente v. Schwab, a class action settlement that awards $8.25 million in attorney fees to the plaintiffs' lawyers but no money to the class.
HLLI director Theodore H. Frank objects to a settlement that provides nearly $9 million to plaintiffs' attorneys, but only hypothetical future injunctive relief.
HLLI objects to a settlement that would pay class counsel $29.4 million, 31% of a $95 million total settlement fund, well above the standard 25% benchmark, and well above the 15-25% percent typical in settlements of similar size.
Washington D.C. — On Tuesday, July 1, the Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute won an appeal in Kurtz v. Kimberly-Clark Corp., which vacated final approval of a lopsided settlement that earmarked more money for attorneys than the class. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated and remanded to the district court. The court agreed with our appeal in holding that the district court “erred when it applied Rule 23(e)…
Bloomberg Law wrote about our successful appeal in Kurtz v. Kimberly-Clark Corp.
Docket number: 1:25-cv-4452 (S.D.N.Y.) On April 18, 2025, the National Science Foundation issued a Policy Directive that reorientated its research funding decisions to the original mission of pursuing scientific research that focuses on intellectual merit that has a broad impact on the country, rather than favor certain narrow classes. The National Science Foundation terminated certain projects that do not align with that mission. The National Science Foundation also implemented a cap…
Ted Frank argued before the Ninth Circuit in In re Google Location History Litigation concerning a settlement that diverts all money to third-parties.
Reuters reported on HLLI's objection on behalf of two car rental franchises to an eleventh-hour request by attorneys to add $93 million to an already-generous fee award in In re Automotive Parts Antitrust Litigation.
CCAF filed an objection on behalf of two car rental franchises to an an eleventh-hour request by attorneys to add $93 million to an already-generous fee award.
