The Ninth Circuit has scheduled oral argument in the Bluetooth case for Monday, February 7, 9 a.m., in the federal courthouse in Pasadena. (Five other cases are on the calendar, so I probably won't get my fifteen minutes until after 10 a.m.) I'm undefeated (well, ok, 1-0) in that courthouse.
The Center filed an objection today in the Northern District of California. Kabateck Brown Kellner, who we've seen before in the $0 AOL settlement and the $117k Classmates.com settlement, are among the lead attorneys in this ripoff as well.
Trial lawyers often say that they care about access to justice, but that principle seems to go out the window when it comes to objectors to unfair class action settlements that might interfere with attorneys' fees. In Dewey v. Volkswagen, currently pending on appeal in the Third Circuit (10-3618, consolidated with 10-3506, 10-3617, 10-3798, and cross-appeals 10-3651 and 10-3652), the plaintiffs' attorneys have asked for an oversized appeal bond explicitly to prevent the…
For the life of me, I can't imagine why a defense attorney with the best interests of his client in mind wouldn't simply say: "You sued us, you defend the settlement. We're paying you hundreds of thousands of dollars to go away. My client shouldn't have to pay another penny into this case."
Unfortunately for the plaintiffs, not only did they sue in the Northern District of Illinois, they sued a corporation where I own shares.
In one sense, the decision is a partial victory for CCAF, yet I still feel disappointment.
In one sense, the decision is a partial victory for CCAF, yet I still feel disappointment.
Tuesday, the Center filed its opening brief appealing the approval of a class action settlement against AOL.
Today we filed our response brief; plaintiffs largely ignored the arguments we made earlier and instead made ad hominem complaints about some quotes that I gave a legal newspaper—when they weren't simply lying about what relevant Third Circuit precedent said.
All well and good, except that my particular notice letter arrived on June 28. That's because, though the settlement occurred on April 28, and the court approved notice on May 11, the parties didn't bother to ask brokers to provide a list of shareholders until June 1, and then, after receiving the list, didn't bother to mail the notice to tens of thousands of shareholders until June 22 or June 23.
_%E2%80%93_Frontansicht,_1._Juni_2013,_Ratingen.jpg){kind=link}