Welcome, Wall Street Journal readers
Welcome to those of you who found this page after reading the Wall Street Journal profile.
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.
Pampers Dry Max class action settlement objection
This week, we objected to a $0 settlement of the Pampers Dry Max class action.
Sirius XM settlement approved
The decision contradicts (and ignores) Bluetooth, Aqua Dots, and the Class Action Fairness Act, and applied the wrong standard of law in creating an essentially irrebuttable presumption of fairness for the settlement.
Opening brief filed in appeal of Volkswagen class action settlement approval
It's still unclear to me why the Third Circuit waited a year before our briefs were due from our appeal.
June 20 was a busy day
The growth of the Center for Class Action Fairness can be shown just by the breadth of its activities on Monday, June 20.
Baby products objection
As discussed at Point of Law, CCAF has filed an objection to the Babies "R" Us settlement in McDonough v. Toys "R" Us, Inc., No. 06-cv-242 (E.D. Pa.).
AOL cy pres Ninth Circuit appeal oral argument set
I'll be arguing the AOL cy pres case June 7 in Pasadena. (My record in Ninth Circuit oral arguments to date: 2-0, with one pending.) Come watch if you're interested in cy pres issues. If you're not interested in cy pres, but are interested in trademarks and pornography (and who isn't?), they're also arguing Roxbury Entertainment v. Penthouse Media ("The content of the film is primarily graphic sex scenes; however, the 'story line' to the extent there is one, concerns…
Illegal coupon settlement in Nevada
We are mystified how the plaintiffs intend to justify the settlement; perhaps they will contend that the $10 discount "certificates" issued to the class are not coupons. The attorneys and class representatives are asking for $1.46 million without even an attempt to predict the redemption rate of these certificates.
Babies “R” Us baby products antitrust class action settlement: McDonough v. Toys “R” Us
But who has the incentive to hire an expensive attorney to object?
Court reduces fees after CCAF objection to HP settlement
So why did the attorneys get $2.1 million? Because of the economic fiction of "fees" and "expenses," which are calculated differently.
