You are here

Court Levels: District

  • Consolidated Litigation

    June 15, 2012

    The Center’s client objected to a settlement over deceptive advertising that promised over $1M to plaintiffs’ lawyers and about $100,000 to the class. The court upheld the objection, eventually reducing the plaintiffs’ lawyers’ fees and sanctioning them for abusive litigation tactics.

  • Lonardo v. Travelers Indemnity Company

    March 31, 2010

    In this settlement over insurance pricing, the Center’s client objected that plaintiffs’ lawyers sought $6.6M when the class would only receive $2.8M; in response, the parties modified the settlement to provide the class an additional $2M.

  • True v. American Honda Motor Company

    February 26, 2010

    The Center for Class Action Fariness's client objected to this settlement over fuel-economy advertising because plaintiffs’ lawyers sought nearly $3M for themselves and merely coupons for the class. The district court sustained the objection, rejecting the settlement.

  • TD Ameritrade Accountholder Litigation

    October 23, 2009

    In this settlement over a data security breach, plaintiffs’ lawyers were seeking $1.87M for themselves and only vouchers for the class: the district court upheld the objection and the settlement was renegotiated to yield cash to the class.

  • Jackson v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A.

    The Center represents a homeowner objecting to a settlement of claims alleging that Wells Fargo received kickbacks on flood hazard determination fees charged to mortgagors. The settlement needlessly requires class members to submit a claim form to receive payment, a burden that will enable the class attorneys to obtain more than their fair share of the proceeds. Compounding the problem, the attorneys’ fee amounts to more than five times their usual billing rate.