Lawyer Decried as 'Serial Objector' Hits Back at Edelson With Lawsuit
Texas-based lawyer Christopher Bandas, who has been accused of making a cottage industry of objecting to class action settlements, is now going after the plaintiffs firm that's suing him.
December 04, 2018 at 04:52 PM
5 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The American Lawyer
|
Less than two weeks after an Illinois appellate court condemned lawyer Christopher Bandas for being a “serial objector” and for the tactics he used while opposing a class action settlement, Bandas has leveled allegations against the prominent plaintiffs class action firm Edelson, describing it as one of “the most notorious and prolific serial class action litigators” in the country and accusing it of conspiring and committing fraud.
The allegations by Bandas, of the Corpus Christi, Texas-based Bandas Law Firm, are included in a countersuit he filed against Edelson on Monday in Chicago federal court. The filing responds to an ongoing lawsuit in which Edelson accused Bandas and some of his associates of making a living by extorting payments from plaintiffs lawyers who negotiate class action settlements.
Edelson's suit, which began in 2016 and originally involved racketeering claims that have since been dismissed, called out Bandas as a so-called serial objector. The suit alleges that Bandas often files frivolous settlement objections, then threatens to continue pursuing those objections unless the lead plaintiffs lawyers pay him a portion of their legal fees from the settlement.
Edelson, which has built a reputation as a leading plaintiffs firm in privacy, data security and consumer protection cases, said it had a firsthand look at this alleged scheme in one of its cases. The firm agreed to pay $225,000 so Bandas would drop an objection to a $13.8 million settlement in Telephone Consumer Protection Act litigation against publisher Gannett Co. Inc., according to court documents. In addition to the now-dismissed racketeering allegations, Edelson's suit included a claim that is still pending, alleging that Bandas engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in Illinois.
The countersuit from Bandas, who is represented by Darren M. VanPuymbrouck of Falkenberg Ives, evoked familiar criticisms that often arise in objections to class settlements—namely, that Edelson put its lawyers' financial welfare above that of the consumers they represent. Those criticisms came packaged in strongly worded accusations against the Edelson team, who Bandas described as “among the most notorious and prolific serial class action litigators” in the country focused on “dubious, lightweight” TCPA cases.
Bandas went on to allege the Edelson lawyers use the class action system to obtain “unjustified profits for themselves” and accused them of engaging in a “grotesque money grab.” To protect those earnings, they allegedly deploy “ruthless and unprincipled attacks” against class members and their lawyers, the countersuit said.
Beyond those more general allegations, Bandas specifically accused the Edelson team of conspiring and committing fraud. The counterclaims allege that Edelson lawyers duped Bandas into a mediation session purportedly aimed at settling an objection in the Gannett case. In reality, said Bandas, that mediation was a “sham” that the Edelson lawyers later used as ammunition for its lawsuit.
Banda's accusations against Edelson come toward the end of a year in which the Texas lawyer has been the target of several tongue-lashings from judges.
In February, U.S. District Judge Rebecca Pallmeyer in Chicago expressed clear frustration with him and other “serial objectors” who “seek private gain” at the expense of class members.
“Gaming the rules of the legal system solely for personal self-enrichment wastes the time and money of courts and attorneys, wrests funds away from deserving litigants, and tarnishes the public's view of the legal process,” Pallmeyer wrote.
Then, on Nov. 20, a three-judge Illinois appeals court panel found Bandas and a lawyer he worked with had engaged in “fraud on the court” in the Gannett class action and referred the duo to attorney disciplinary authorities in Illinois.
Reached for comment on Tuesday, Edelson founder Jay Edelson noted the Illinois appeals court's recent finding and described Bandas' countersuit as frivolous.
“Mr. Bandas was found to have committed fraud on the court—one of the worst things a lawyer could do,” Edelson said in an email. “His reaction is to sue us, essentially claiming that we should have kept his conduct quiet, as many others in the plaintiffs bar have done through the years.
“His suit is, of course, frivolous and seems to be a last desperate attempt of a man who realizes that the chickens have finally come home to roost.”
Read More:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllJudge Approves 23andMe's $30M Data Breach Settlement - With Conditions
5 minute readOn Governor's Desk: NY 'Death Gamble' Bill That Seeks to Correct Pension Anomaly for Judges
'Serious Misconduct' From Monsanto Lawyer Prompts Mistrial in Chicago Roundup Case
3 minute readCleary vs. White & Case: NY Showdown Over $5 Billion Brazilian Bankruptcy
Trending Stories
- 1Justices Will Weigh Constitutionality of Law Allowing Terror Victims to Sue PLO
- 2Nevada Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Groundbreaking Contingency Cap Ballot Measure
- 3OpenAI Tells Court It Will Seek to Consolidate Copyright Suits Under MDL
- 44th Circuit Allows State Felon Voting Ban Challenge to Go Forward
- 5Class Actions Claim Progressive Undervalues Totaled Cars
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250