8 results for 'cat:"Settlements" AND cat:"Consumer Law" AND cat:"Class Action"'.
J. Tjoflat finds that the district court improperly entered an order approving the proposed $35 million settlement agreement, certifying the class and granting attorney fees up to $10.5 million in a class action alleging that GoDaddy violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act by using an automatic telephone dialing system to make calls and send texts to consumers' phones. The district court failed to apply the latest version of the amended procedural rule in finding that the proposed settlement was fair. The district court breached its fiduciary duty because the approved settlement agreement advanced the attorneys' interests over those of the absent class members. Class counsel provided insufficient information to enable the district court to comply with a procedural rule. The district court also applied an incorrect legal standard in calculating the attorney fees. Vacated.
Court: 11th Circuit, Judge: Tjoflat, Filed On: May 13, 2024, Case #: 21-10199, Categories: settlements, consumer Law, class Action
J. Humetewa partly grants a class of consumers' motion for final approval of a class action settlement for Fair Credit Reporting Act claims against a credit reporting agency. The class sufficiently showed in court that it is entitled to monetary recovery, but not an adjustment for a higher settlement for each class member, after prevailing on claims that the credit reporting agency "resold patently false consumer reports" that indicated that they were deceased.
Court: USDC Arizona, Judge: Humetewa, Filed On: April 12, 2024, Case #: 2:21cv2082, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: settlements, consumer Law, class Action
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Lipman grants the customers' motion for preliminary approval of a consolidated class action settlement in this negligence case concerning an alleged rodent infestation at a Family Dollar distribution center, which resulted in a voluntary recall of certain products. The objections raised by the State of Arkansas, which intervened in the case, are overruled. The Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act does not prohibit class settlements, and the settlement is not deficient.
Court: USDC Western District of Tennessee , Judge: Lipman, Filed On: October 27, 2023, Case #: 2:22cv2138, NOS: Other Fraud - Torts - Personal Property, Categories: settlements, consumer Law, class Action
J. Huff grants preliminary approval to a $5.69 million settlement in a class action accusing the credit reporting company of reselling inaccurate information with false notations stating that the consumer was deceased. In addition to the monetary award, defendant will also be required to improve its reporting practices to more clearly state that the data it is reporting is precisely the data it received from the nationwide credit reporting agencies and that the company cannot evaluate its content. Class members will each receive pro rata payments from the net settlement fund.
Court: USDC Southern District of California, Judge: Huff, Filed On: October 2, 2023, Case #: 3:22cv498, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: settlements, consumer Law, class Action
J. Oberto grants an individual’s unopposed motion for preliminary approval of a class action settlement of credit reporting claims. The settlement, which includes an automatic $1,000 payout to each class member in exchange for a broad release of claims, is fair, adequate and reasonable.
Court: USDC Eastern District of California, Judge: Oberto, Filed On: June 1, 2023, Case #: 1:18cv1359, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: settlements, consumer Law, class Action