Frank v. Poertner
CCAF objected in Poertner v. Gillette Co., a settlement of consumer fraud claims over Duracell batteries where the attorneys received $5.7 million and the class only $0.3 million.
The district court approved the settlement and oversized fee request, and the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the approval, on the grounds that the cy pres and injunctive relief provisions of the settlement made it fair–even though the injunction covered only a discontinued brand of battery.
CCAF’s objection, however, led class counsel to admit that the vast majority of consumer fraud settlements leave more than 99% of class members uncompensated.
CCAF filed a petition for a writ of certiorari asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case on December 11, 2015.
UPDATED: On March 21, 2016, the Supreme Court declined to hear the case.