- Wednesday, I argued the case of Kazman v. Frontier Oil in Houston, which raises the issue of whether Texas law permits the "deal tax": the extortionate lawsuits over merger disclosures that get settled for pricy attorneys' fees and nothing of value to the shareholders that the attorneys are supposed to be representing. Thanks to client CEI attorney Sam Kazman, and to D. Wade Carvell, who was both extraordinarily generous and effective with his pro bono time on the case. [CEI press release; Kazman podcast; earlier on POL; more on POL]
- West Virginia medical monitoring settlement: $6.62 million for attorneys, up to $6.58 million in funding for medical examinations for class, but the money is likely to go to charity, and there will be no free exams after 2014. I'm quoted, after the West Virginia Record called me up for my analysis.
- Legal Newsline covers the Southwest Airlines drink voucher class action settlement. [Legal Newsline; earlier on POL]
Class action settlements in the news
Related Entries:
- In re Southwest Airlines Voucher Litigation class action settlement
- Maybe that AIG case isn't so crazy?
- RICO jury verdict on fraudulent asbestos claims
- Press coverage of Citigroup Securities Litigation contract-lawyer fee request
- Blessing v. Sirius XM en banc petitions
- Fraser v. Asus Computer
- Request for assistance: In re Citigroup Securities Litigation
- Second Circuit "punts" in Blessing v. Sirius
- Stop complaining about the legal job market
- O'Quinn silicosis clients sue
- Pecover v. Electronic Arts class action settlement objection
- CCAF objects to Easy Saver coupon settlement
- Blessing v. Sirius XM Second Circuit argument tomorrow morning
- Toyota settles shareholder suit over sudden acceleration hysteria
![]() |
| Isaac Gorodetski Project Manager, Center for Legal Policy at the Manhattan Institute igorodetski@manhattan-institute.org |
![]() |
| Laura Eyi Press Officer, Manhattan Institute leyi@manhattan-institute.org |




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.