Reuters’ Alison Frankel covers CCAF’s motion to unseal the proposed order written by plaintiffs to approve the Equifax settlement:
Judge Thrash’s written opinion in January was much more extensive than his oral opinion at the end of the fairness hearing. It was also much more critical of objectors to the settlement, including Frank. As I wrote at the time, the judge lumped Frank in with objectors’ counsel who have faced court criticism for filing objections only to extract payouts from class counsel, accusing Frank of promoting “false and misleading information” about the Equifax deal to gin up opposition to the settlement. (For what it’s worth, I’ve been covering Frank and his class action objections for long enough to be convinced that he is not motivated by personal gain but by a genuine belief that some settlements are not in the best interest of class members.)
After Judge Thrash issued his January opinion, Frank and some other objectors moved to supplement the trial court record with the ex parte proposed order from class counsel. Equifax, represented by King & Spalding, said it had no objection to disclosure. Class counsel also said they had no objection, though their brief emphasized that because Judge Thrash had quite obviously engaged in independent review of the issues, including at a four-hour fairness hearing, the judge would be justified in denying the motion.
Read the whole article at Reuters.