"This case is really about attorneys selling out their clients," Holyoak told the Washington Free Beacon. "We are arguing that this is unfair, and this is an abuse of the class action system, and an abuse of the cy pres system."
“The settlement at issue in Frank vs. Gaos epitomizes cy pres abuse in class actions, where money is funneled to a slush fund for lawyers to send to their alma maters and pet causes rather than their clients,” CEI Senior Attorney Melissa Holyoak told Legal Newsline.
CCAF senior attorney Melissa Holyoak told me: “Attorneys’ fees should always be based upon and proportionate to the relief actually received by class members—that’s something we fight for on a regular basis.”
"Although these class members had their financial data stolen, they are releasing future-damages claims against Target in exchange for nothing," Holyoak said.
“The settlement was unfair because the attorneys' fees award was grossly disproportionate to the relief actually delivered to the class, Holyoak said. "Before the Center for Class Action Fairness objected, the plaintiffs’ attorneys were to receive $2.11 million, while the class members would have received $412,815 in coupons.”
“Over 99 percent of the Target data breach class gets nothing in this multi-million-dollar settlement, so we are glad that the Eighth Circuit recognizes that the district court cannot rubber-stamp settlements where class counsel cuts corners on procedural fairness so they can get paid quickly and generously,” said Melissa Holyoak, an attorney with the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Center for Class Action Fairness.
