Analysis of Sharper Image Opinion
Ok, I've had a chance to read Judge Altonaga's stunning rejection of Bob Parks' proposed Sharper Image settlement.
The Judge wrote a thoughtful, impressive opinion, with substantial analysis and with copious citation to on-point authority. It will be a roadmap for any review of class action settlements in the Southern District, particularly any that include coupons. Indeed, by the time the third iteration of the settlement was presented to the Court, it had become in her words a "near perfect" coupon settlement.
The problem was that Parks settled cheap, as the Court noted. If those improvements were available by the time the third settlement agreement was reached, why weren't they available from the beginning? Mike Tein was able to get documents and communications between Parks and Sharper Image attorneys, and they revealed that the $19 coupon amount was pretty much pulled from thin air.
And she found that Parks was negotiating from a weak position, in that his case was a later-filed copycat case that was about to be abated by the Court in deference to Tein's earlier-filed, California action that was already certified as a class and was on the verge of trial.
To me, I have to ask why Parks would put his career and reputation, earned over decades of great trial work, on the line for $1.85 million? How could it be worth it?
Why didn't he reach out to Tein and include him and his group in on the settlement? Was this all about ego? Hubris? Certainly it can't just be about money.
Incidentally, I have heard from multiple sources that Tein was simply brilliant at the evidentiary hearing in August. I am so proud of him; congratulations for a well-deserved, historic victory.
The Judge wrote a thoughtful, impressive opinion, with substantial analysis and with copious citation to on-point authority. It will be a roadmap for any review of class action settlements in the Southern District, particularly any that include coupons. Indeed, by the time the third iteration of the settlement was presented to the Court, it had become in her words a "near perfect" coupon settlement.
The problem was that Parks settled cheap, as the Court noted. If those improvements were available by the time the third settlement agreement was reached, why weren't they available from the beginning? Mike Tein was able to get documents and communications between Parks and Sharper Image attorneys, and they revealed that the $19 coupon amount was pretty much pulled from thin air.
And she found that Parks was negotiating from a weak position, in that his case was a later-filed copycat case that was about to be abated by the Court in deference to Tein's earlier-filed, California action that was already certified as a class and was on the verge of trial.
To me, I have to ask why Parks would put his career and reputation, earned over decades of great trial work, on the line for $1.85 million? How could it be worth it?
Why didn't he reach out to Tein and include him and his group in on the settlement? Was this all about ego? Hubris? Certainly it can't just be about money.
Incidentally, I have heard from multiple sources that Tein was simply brilliant at the evidentiary hearing in August. I am so proud of him; congratulations for a well-deserved, historic victory.
Yorumlar
Yorum Gönder