$17M Target Breach Deal Imperiled by Conflict Allegations

Bloomberg BNA discusses an important ruling in CEI’s Center for Class Action Fairness’s objection to the Target data brea

Objectors to the fairness of the settlement applauded both the new look at class status and the Eighth Circuit’s additional finding that the objectors were required to pay an excessive bond in order to appeal.

“Over 99 percent of the Target data breach class gets nothing in this multimillion 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,” objector counsel Melissa Holyoak of the Center for Class Action Fairness in Washington told Bloomberg BNA in an e-mailed statement.

Under the terms of the settlement, class members with documented losses are compensated from the fund first, and the remainder is distributed among class members with undocumented losses. Those who suffered no loss from the security breach receive nothing.

Class member Leif Olson objected to the settlement, arguing the named class members, who were compensated from the fund, shouldn’t have been allowed to represent those like him who suffered no losses.

…

Olson and fellow objector Jim Sciaroni also challenged the district court’s order requiring them to post a $49,000 bond to cover the costs of the appeal.

…

It ordered the district court to reduce the bond to reflect only those costs the class would recover if they win on any issues remaining on appeal after the district court reconsiders class certification.

Holyoak called the move “a major victory for objectors in the Eighth Circuit because it prohibits class counsel from using excessive appeal bonds to block an objector’s appeal.”

Read the full article at Bloomberg BNA.