Sixth Circuit victory: In re Dry Max Pampers Litigation
A great opinion protecting class members against predatory attorneys. Congratulations to CCAF attorney Adam Schulman (Georgetown Law '10), who won his first appellate oral argument.
A great opinion protecting class members against predatory attorneys. Congratulations to CCAF attorney Adam Schulman (Georgetown Law '10), who won his first appellate oral argument.
A federal appeals court has overturned a class action settlement that gave the plaintiffs’ lawyers $2.73 million and Pampers customers with receipts and UPC codes a refund on a box of diapers.
The recent decision by the Sixth Circuit, overturning approval of a class action settlement in In re Dry Max Pampers Litigation (6th Cir. Aug. 2, 2013), is another in a string of wins for the Center for Class Action Fairness, which objects to settlements it considers unjust, and another reminder to class action defendants that they have to bear objections in mind when negotiating settlements.
That settlement was challenged by the Center for Class Action Fairness, a Washington nonprofit that challenges class-action settlements it views to be unfair. “When attorneys get more than the class is getting, it’s an unfair settlement,” said Ted Frank, the organization’s founder. “The class counsel owes an obligation to its clients to get a good deal for them before it gets paid.”
“We’re very pleased – we’re doing this to play traffic cop and make the law better,” Frank said. “The class attorneys have a fiduciary responsibility to their clients, but a lot of attorneys prefer to just negotiate settlements where they get all the money and their clients get imaginary relief.” Far too often, Frank said, judges rubber stamp such settlements.
On Friday (with generous pro bono work from BakerHostetler) we filed our first cert petition, and the first substantive request that the Supreme Court clarify the law of cy pres.
On Friday, Frank and lawyers from Baker Hostetler filed a petition for a writ of certiorari at the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to review the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals’ approval of a $9.5 million settlement of class action allegations that Facebook’s now-dismantled “Beacon” program violated users’ privacy by revealing their online purchases.
One hopes a class member aggrieved by this lawyers-first settlement will contact a non-profit attorney willing to help them object to a settlement with such an unfair and illegal fee request.
A 2-1 decision of the Ninth Circuit agreed with us that the district court incorrectly applied the coupon-valuation provision of the Class Action Fairness Act in the HP Inkjet case.
Instead, the lower court "estimated the 'ultimate value' of the settlement to the class at roughly $1.5 million," Smith wrote, noting that it recognized "that it would be improper to award fees that outstrip the calculated class benefit."