Today the Center for Class Action Fairness filed an objection to the $3.4 billion taxpayer-funded Cobell Indian trust settlement on behalf of Sisseton-Wahpeton Ovate tribe member and class member Kimberly Craven.
Congress recently held hearings in response to the class attorneys' fee request of $223 million, which was over twice the $99.9 million they promised Congress they would limit their request to. [BLT]
The fee request includes one $925/hour attorney who claims to have billed over 28,000 hours in seven years, including a 28.5-hour day. The class representatives have also requested an unprecedented $13 million payment for themselves, raising conflict-of-interest questions that could preclude settlement approval.
Ms. Craven's objection, among other issues, challenges the "upside-down" allocation methodology, where class members who have suffered the most mismanagement of their trust accounts will receive less money than equally situated class members whose trust accounts were administered appropriately.
The settlement and objection present interesting legal issues of whether Congress can constitutionally abrogate class action certification requirements and whether a mandatory class action for injunctive relief can involuntarily waive class members' rights to relief already won in court in exchange for one-size-fits-all cash payments.
The case is Cobell v. Salazar, No. 1:96-cv-1285 (TFH) (D.D.C.).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The brief is solid legally, but reads a bit hysterical to me. It makes exact arguments, but the tone makes it feel exaggerated. Is that just me or do others get the same sense? And if so, is this a strategic decision? Honestly, to me, it makes the legal arguments seem weaker.
ReplyDelete