The HLLI blog reflects the views of individual attorneys who author each post. This commentary does not necessarily reflect the official position of the Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute.
In the In re Apple MagSafe Power Adapter Litigation, the attorneys walked away with $3.1 million, while the class got less than $1 million, and likely less than a quarter of what the attorneys got. The district court (Judge Ware in the N.D. Cal.) not only rubber-stamped the settlement while ignoring the Bluetooth precedent, but then issued an order to protect the illegitimate settlement, requiring a punitive appeal bond or the dismissal of any…
The Center for Class Action Fairness is putting that question to the test by asking the District of New Jersey to dismiss shareholder litigation that makes cosmetic changes to corporate governance, and then presents a $10.45 million bill to shareholders—150% of the already high "lodestar"—for the involuntary consulting arrangement
On July 31, district courts substantially reduced attorney fees in two class action settlements where Center for Class Action Fairness attorneys objected. In the Nutella litigation in the District of New Jersey, Judge Wolfson agreed with our objection that the parties overstated the value of the injunctive relief, and reduced the fee award from $3,725,000 to $1,125,000. More discussion at Point of Law. And in the remand of the Bluetooth class action settlement in the Central District of…
Briefing is complete, and oral argument will be some time in the second half of September. Details at Point of Law.
CCAF is now 4-1 in federal appeals, which is remarkable, given that CCAF-affiliated attorneys represent the appellant in each case and there are rarely as many as four reversals of class action settlement-related district court opinions in a single year from all objectors combined.
Coincidentally, the same day, the Center for Class Action Fairness filed its opening brief relating to the yet-to-be-proposed multi-million-dollar cy pres distribution in In re Baby Products.
If you listen to one oral argument from March 27, well, I have to say that you need to listen to Paul Clement's performance in HHS v. Florida. But if you have time for a second oral argument, and you have a hankering for Third Circuit class action action, I'd be curious about your thoughts of the argument in Dewey v. Volkswagen. See also. Following up on our earlier post, the Third Circuit denied the motion for…
It had been a few years since I took a deposition, so it was refreshing to see that I wasn't as rusty as I was worried I'd be.
