Ted Frank, Center for Class Action Fairness (Courtesy photo)
"We conclude that the case should be remanded for the courts below to address the plaintiffs’ standing in light of Spokeo," the justices said. Justice Clarence Thomas, in dissent, would have reached the merits and vacated the settlement.
March 20, 2019 at 10:24 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Nationallawjournal/nationallawjournal
The U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday stopped short of prohibiting a form of class action settlements in which funds awarded go to unrelated third parties and lawyers but not to the parties making claims.
The justices in Frank v. Gaos, which involved an $8.5 million internet privacy settlement with Google, did not address the legality of class settlements featuring only “cy pres” funds going to third-party groups and organizations and not to plaintiffs.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
