Subscribe Subscribe   Find us on Twitter Follow POL on Twitter  



HP Inkjet oral argument

| No Comments

I was in San Francisco Monday arguing the HP Inkjet appeal before the Ninth Circuit, questioning whether a settlement that paid attorneys $2.1 million when the class received less than $1.5 million in worthless coupons can be considered fair—especially when the defendant put cash on the table that it got to keep at the expense of the class. The oral argument is online, as are the briefs; I'll confess surprise that the definition of "redeemed" in the Class Action Fairness Act was controversial.

(The Center for Class Action Fairness is not affiliated with the Manhattan Institute.)

Leave a comment

Once submitted, the comment will first be reviewed by our editors and is not guaranteed to be published. Point of Law editors reserve the right to edit, delete, move, or mark as spam any and all comments. They also have the right to block access to any one or group from commenting or from the entire blog. A comment which does not add to the conversation, runs of on an inappropriate tangent, or kills the conversation may be edited, moved, or deleted.

The views and opinions of those providing comments are those of the author of the comment alone, and even if allowed onto the site do not reflect the opinions of Point of Law bloggers or the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research or any employee thereof. Comments submitted to Point of Law are the sole responsibility of their authors, and the author will take full responsibility for the comment, including any asserted liability for defamation or any other cause of action, and neither the Manhattan Institute nor its insurance carriers will assume responsibility for the comment merely because the Institute has provided the forum for its posting.

Related Entries:



Rafael Mangual
Project Manager,
Legal Policy

Manhattan Institute


Published by the Manhattan Institute

The Manhattan Insitute's Center for Legal Policy.