Contributors
813.229.4304
407.244.8235
305.539.7371
813.229.4362
305.539.7309
305.539.7326
813.229.4324
561.822.2972
813.229.4957
561.650.8014
813.229.4308
305.539.7332
212.380.9612
305.539.7205
305.539.7330
561.650.0354
813.229.4251
407.244.8229
407.244.8226

Fifth Circuit


August 16, 2012 4:02 PM | Posted by Tinsley, Katie | Permalink
Class certification denied where fact finder would have to engage in a file-by-file review based on Texas title insurance company's ad hoc policy to determine whether putative class members qualified for a mandatory title insurance premium discount. read more
March 2, 2012 4:02 PM | Posted by Tinsley, Katie | Permalink
In an unpublished opinion, the Fifth Circuit declined to consider a plaintiff’s request for class certification pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 finding that the complaint's allegations failed to merit such status and because “dismissal of Plaintiff’s complaint on its merits mooted any request for class certification.”  Conditt v. Owens, No. 11-50426, slip. op. 2012 WL 29128, at *2 (5th Cir. Jan. 6, 2012).  Therefore, the court denied Plaintiff’s motion on appeal for class certification.  Id. read more
February 29, 2012 11:45 AM | Posted by Tinsley, Katie | Permalink

Two Settlement Class Member objectors appealed the approval of a proposed settlement agreement creating a $40 million settlement fund to be allocated among class members and their attorneys.  Union Asset Mgmt Holding A.G. v. Dell, Inc., --- F.3d ----, 2012 WL 375249, *1 (5th Cir., Feb. 7, 2012).   The class representatives allege that Defendant Dell and its officers, “violated the Securities Exchange Act  . . . by fraudulently inflating reported revenues, engaging in erroneous accounting, and disseminating false information to the public.”  Id.   The two objectors assert, inter alia, that the “court erred in using the percentage method to calculate class counsel’s fees.”  Id.

read more