Google Privacy Deal Is ‘Clear Abuse,’ High Court Told
Law360 covers CCAF's Supreme Court case Frank v. Gaos.
Google Privacy Class Objectors Tell High Court Cy Pres-Only Settlement is Unfair
Mealy's covers CCAF's Supreme Court case Frank v. Gaos.
CCAF Files Supreme Court Brief in Case Challenging Abuse of Class Action System
Today the Center for Class Action Fairness filed its opening brief in Frank v. Gaos, a case before the U.S. Supreme Court challenging a class action settlement that provided zero dollars to class members, more than $2 million to the lawyers, and the remaining $5.3 million to third-party organizations unrelated to the case. Those organizations include class counsel’s alma maters and nonprofits to which defendant Google already contributes. This unfair practice of giving away class members’ money…
Google Privacy Case To Test Limits Of Novel Settlements
Law360 cited CCAF attorney Anna St. John and Director of Litigation Ted Frank after the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear CEI's case, Frank v. Gaos. CEI hopes the court rules in our favor and creates a standard that forbids attorneys from misusing class action settlements to selfishly put themselves and third parties ahead of their clients. Justices are set for the first time to consider the cy pres remedy, which distributes awards in class actions to parties…
Supreme Court Grants Cert in Google Privacy Case Frank v. Gaos
Today the Supreme Court granted cert in Frank v. Gaos, a challenge to the class action settlement negotiated by the plaintiffs’ lawyers in Gaos v. Google which provided $0 to class members and $8.5 million to be divided between the plaintiffs’ lawyers – who received $1000/hour on this case – and third-party charities unrelated to the case.
Supreme Court to Decide on Reining in Class-Action Deals that Only Pay Lawyers and their Favored Institutions
Critics of these settlements described them as a form of suspect collusion between plaintiffs' lawyers and corporate defendants, since both benefit by arranging a settlement. Leading the challenge to these deals is Ted Frank, a Washington lawyer who regularly objects to class-action settlements.
‘Cy Pres’ Settlement Review
But Theodore Frank and Melissa Ann Holyoak objected to what is called a “cy pres” agreement and said Monday they were gratified the court had taken the case. “We are hopeful that the Supreme Court’s review will result in a standard forbidding attorneys from misusing class-action settlements to selfishly put themselves and third parties ahead of their clients,” said Frank
Frank v. Gaos
Class members and CCAF attorneys Ted Frank and Melissa Holyoak take their objection to Google search settlement to the Supreme Court. The settlement provided $0 to class members, but divided $8.5 million between the plaintiffs’ lawyers and third party cy pres recipients.
Supreme Court Will Take a Closer Look at Class Actions
In objecting to the Google settlement, they said research centers based at Harvard and Stanford universities, among those slated for awards, had connections to both sides in the case: Google already supported the centers, and some plaintiffs’ attorneys had attended the schools.
U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Google Privacy Settlement Dispute
The deal’s opponents were led by Ted Frank, director of litigation for the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a Washington-based conservative think tank. They said the deal violated procedural rules in U.S. law requiring settlements to be fair, reasonable and adequate.
