Kansas, Journey, et al. v. Garland et al. (ATF rule challenge)
On behalf of a firearms collector and hobbyist, HLLI filed a lawsuit over the Biden Administration's new rule that restricts gun sales between private citizens.
In re Google Location History Litigation
HLLI represents objectors challenging a cy pres settlement that pays $0 to the class but $62 million for attorneys' fees and to third-party organizations, many of which have pre-existing relationships with Google or the attorneys.
MacClelland v. Cellco Partnership (Verizon intervention)
The Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute represents four intervenors who are challenging plaintiffs’ counsel’s forum shopping tactics in settling a nationwide class action in a state court likely to award more fees out of class recovery than attorneys would get in federal court, where the action was first filed.
In re Advocate Aurora Health Pixel Litigation
HLLI represents an objector challenging a proposed settlement where class counsel seeks an outsized percentage of the settlement amount for themselves and which caps class members claims at pennies on the dollar.
Lundy v. Meta Platforms, Inc.
The Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute successfully represented an objector challenging a proposed settlement to the extent the court exercises the option to divert all or part of the $37 million fund to third parties rather than to the class.
Sharpe v. A&W Concentrate Co.
HLLI represents its director, Theodore H. Frank, in objecting to a purported “$15 million settlement” that in fact delivers perhaps $2 million to class members, and earmarks $3.2 million for attorneys’ fees.
Image Credit: Jorge Franganillo
In re: Altria Group, Inc. Derivative Litigation
Theodore H. Frank moved to intervene and reopen a shareholder derivative settlement approved in February, which would destroy at least $125 million in shareholder value.
In re JUUL Labs, Inc. Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation
HLLI represents an objector challenging the fairness of a settlement that pays class counsel $76,500,000 in attorneys’ fees, and deducts $5 million more in expenses and service awards, well above the standard 25% benchmark, and much higher than the 15-20% expected in a settlement of this size.
Utah, et al. v. Su
HLLI challenges the Department of Labor’s rule undermines key protections for retirement savings of 152 million workers in the name of promoting environmental, social, and governance (“ESG”) factors in investing over the rigid duty of loyalty and prudence that plan fiduciaries owe to plan investors.
Piggy Bank
In re All-Clad Metalcrafters LLC, Cookware Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation
HLLI challenges the fairness of a settlement that pays class counsel over 80% of the settlement fund, with only a few hundred thousand going to class members.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- …
- 11
- Go to the next page