The Babies "R" Us settlement in McDonough v. Toys "R" Us, Inc., No. 06-cv-242 (E.D. Pa.) has the attorneys requesting a $14 million share of a $34.24 million settlement fund—over 40% of that denominator. But the remainder of the $20 million isn't even entirely designated for the class (third parties are designees for much of the amount, and there's an unedifying cy pres provision in the settlement), so the requested award to attorneys will likely be much higher than 40% of class benefit. The settlement demonstrates many of the ways class action attorneys maximize fees while minimizing cost to defendants unwilling to settle for much more than nuisance amounts. Last week, the Center for Class Action Fairness LLC, through attorney Dan Greenberg, filed an objection on behalf of a class member. (I manage CCAF, but it is not affiliated with the Manhattan Institute.)
Objection in Babies "R" Us class action settlement
- New Featured Discussion:"Class actions: rife with abuse or an important legal safeguard?"
- Around the web, April 11
- What does the Baylor Law data leak tell us about affirmative action?
- "Attorney fee-only" bankruptcy plans
- Apple iPhone 4 bumper class action settlement
- Third Circuit argument in Dewey v. Volkswagen
- Dewey v. Volkswagen oral argument tomorrow
- How much is the Bluetooth settlement injunction worth?
- CCAF Seventh Circuit briefing on derivative shareholder suit standards
- Around the web, March 13
- Plaintiffs' lawyers protect their cartel by bringing antitrust suit
- Day v. Persels & Associates
- Bad typography evidence of bad faith?
- Suffolk County DA slush fund?
- Update on California foreign policy efforts
Center for Legal Policy at the