FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Pittsburgh, PA—The Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute’s Center for Class Action Fairness filed an objection to a fee request in a shareholder settlement over Mylan Pharmaceuticals stock.
Plaintiffs’ attorneys would requested more than $14.9 million in attorneys’ fees — roughly 25% of the net settlement fund — though the settlement they negotiated recovers only about a penny per class member dollar of damages alleged. For example, the complaint alleges that shareholders lost over $14 per share because of fraud, but the settlement notice predicts that class members will recover $0.11/share from the settlement—minus the 25% the attorneys are requesting.
The request would also give plaintiffs’ attorneys sole authority to divide attorneys’ fees among several law firms, without public disclosure or court oversight. And it abandons the original agreement between the attorneys and the plaintiff, a Mississippi government pension fund. That undisclosed agreement, which was available on a Mississippi state government website, capped fees at less than half of what the attorneys are requesting now.
The underlying case, In re Mylan N.V. Securities Litigation, alleges that Mylan Pharmaceuticals misrepresented its manufacturing and testing processes to shareholders and regulators, exposing the company to legal liability and inflating the share price. The Mississippi Public Employees’ Retirement System (MissPERS), which owned Mylan stock, sued on behalf of the class over losses allegedly caused by Mylan’s misrepresentations.
MissPERS was represented by Bernstein Litowitz, which has a long history of representing the pension fund. HLLI’s objection notes that credible reports from independent media, a Bernstein Litowitz whistleblower, and academic sources suggest the existence of a “pay-to-play” relationship between MissPERS and the firm involving unnecessary legal work being directed to Mississippi lawyers when that money should be routed to the class.
“HLLI is objecting to the fee request because the attorneys are requesting more than twice as much as what they agreed to in advance,” said Ted Frank, HLLI’s director of litigation and acting president, and the objecting shareholder in the case. “Class counsel owes a duty of candor to the court and to the class, yet presented an impermissibly opaque fee request that hid their originally negotiated fee agreement with the state government. What side agreements took place that MissPERS is permitting the attorneys to request twice as much? We hope the court fully investigates, and denies the fee request until there is full transparency and then caps the request at the contractually agreed percentage and returns the extra millions to the class.”
On Thursday, the court ordered further briefing to take place in June ahead of the June 15 hearing on the fee request.
The name of the case is In re Mylan N.V. Securities Litigation, No. 2:20-cv-00955 (W.D.Pa.).
Contact:
Ted Frank, Director of Litigation and Acting President
(703) 203-3848, ted.frank@hlli.org.
###
Every day, there are attempts to encroach upon Americans’ constitutionally protected rights. Our legal work is dedicated to countering these efforts.
The Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute is a public interest law firm dedicated to:
- Dismantling the progressive left’s attacks on civil society
- Countering government overreach
- Fighting class action abuse
- Combating NGOs engaging in civil terrorism
As a nonprofit, tax-exempt organization as defined by section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, HLLI relies on support from individuals and foundations that share a commitment to individual liberty, free enterprise, and limited government. To learn more, visit http://www.hlli.org.