New Jersey
Civil Justice Institute

  • Helpful Links
  • Contact Us
  • HOME
  • ABOUT US
    • Our Mission
    • Membership
    • Our Staff
  • ISSUES & ADVOCACY
  • OUR WORK IN THE COURTS
  • NEWSROOM
  • GET INVOLVED

Fairness. Justice.
Rule of Law.

Tag Archives: Trial Lawyers

Jersey Law Firm Loses Out On Footlong Payday

September 21, 2017News, Top StoriesClass Actions, Legal Reform, Outrageous Lawsuits, Trial LawyersNJCJI

footlongA law firm in Evesham, New Jersey is fuming at the fact that the Subway “Footlong” settlement was thrown out.

 

As the Courier-Post reports:

DeNittis Osefchen Prince P.C. of Evesham was expected to share in a $520,000 payment by the restaurant chain, a sum intended to settle a class-action lawsuit over the actual length of Subway’s six- and 12-inch sandwiches.

 

But a federal appeals court in Chicago has rejected the deal, saying it would have enriched attorneys while doing nothing for most Subway customers.

 

In a sometimes-sharply worded decision, the three-judge panel described the settlement as “no better than a racket.”

 

The Race to the Courthouse

The suit filed by the attorneys at DeNittis Osefchen Prince, was the first of eight similar lawsuits that were filed after a photo showing a sandwich measuring only 11 inches went viral. All the suits were eventually consolidated as multi-district litigation in the Eastern District of Wisconsin.

 

Plaintiff counsel soon realized their claim for damages had no merit since Subway’s bread dough is apportioned by weight, and standardized fillings means no consumer was deprived of any food. So, they shifted from a claim for damages to a claim for injunctive relief, and Subway agreed to a settlement, promising to implement the same quality control measures that were already in place, and to pay class counsel $520,000.

 

Ted Frank, the founder and director of the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Center for Class Action Fairness,  objected to the settlement, arguing that the class had received nothing and their attorneys were the only beneficiaries of the deal. The district judge nevertheless approved settlement.

 

 

Frank appealed, and a Seventh Circuit panel rejected the settlement unanimously. Judge Sykes wrote the decision and condemned the settlement in scathing terms. Citing precedent from a previous Ted Frank objection, she wrote that “no class action settlement that yields zero benefits for the class should be approved, and a class action that seeks only worthless benefits for the class should be dismissed out of hand.”

 

This is Happening Too Often

The race to be first to the courthouse to file even meritless lawsuits exists because there is no penalty for being incorrect – the Subway suit demonstrates that even when that claim turns out to be meritless, the attorneys will still walk away with good chunk of money, absent an objection.

 

The attorneys in the footlong case plainly believe they did nothing wrong. In the Courier-Post article, attorney Stephen DeNittis disputes claims that the settlement was “a windfall for the attorneys at the expense of the class” He said, “Such was clearly not the case. There were 10 law firms involved in the 3 1/2-year-long action who devoted well over 2,000 hours in time in litigating the matter.”

 

Unfortunately for them, work put into a worthless project doesn’t turn a sow’s ear into a silk purse.

 

A Bright Line Rule

The New Jersey Civil Justice Institute supports Frank’s effort to create a bright line rule that will discourage class action abuse and inspire courts to toss sham settlements. Businesses should only be forced to pay out when they have done something wrong, not be punished for having deep pockets.

 

Top News Clips for the Week of July 8-14

July 14, 2017News, Recent NewsOutrageous Lawsuits, Trial LawyersNJCJI

A selection of the need-to-know civil justice news for the week of July 8-14. Continue reading →

Top News Clips for the Week of May 27-June 2

June 2, 2017News, Recent NewsClass Actions, Food Law, Patent Law, SCOTUS, Trial LawyersNJCJI

A selection of the need-to-know civil justice news for the week of May 27-June 2. Continue reading →

Top News Clips for the Week of April 29-May 5

May 5, 2017News, Recent NewsFood Law, New Jersey Courts, Pharmaceutical Litigation, Trial LawyersNJCJI

A selection of the need-to-know civil justice news for the week of April 29-May 5. Continue reading →

Top News Clips for the Week of April 22-28

April 28, 2017News, Recent NewsNew Jersey Courts, TCCWNA, Trial LawyersNJCJI

A selection of the need-to-know civil justice news for the week of April 22-28.

 

3rd Circ. Asks NJ Justices To Define ‘Aggrieved’ Consumer

Jeannie O’Sullivan | Law360

The New Jersey Supreme Court [has agreed] to determine if a consumer is considered aggrieved if they’ve entered into an unlawful contract, but haven’t actually incurred damages, in order to better prepare the Third Circuit to consider putative class actions involving consumer protection claims.

Read more.

 

Lawyer Accused of Billing Over 24 Hours in a Day Suspended; but Official Said Others Were Worse

Debra Cassens Weiss | ABA Journal

West Virginia’s top court imposed a two-year suspension on a lawyer who submitted bills for court-appointed work for more than 24 hours a day on two different occasions.

Read more.

 

VW Judge Dares Plaintiffs’ Lawyers To Go After Clients For Fees

Alison Frankel | Reuters

It’s obvious from a ruling Monday by U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer of San Francisco that the judge does not think owners of Volkswagen “clean diesel” cars needed individual counsel. The judge denied motions by 244 plaintiffs’ lawyers who wanted VW to pay them for the time they spent drafting filings for individual car owners, suggesting edits to classwide filings and advising their clients about developments in the case, including advice about whether to participate in the $10 billion class action settlement.

Read more.

 

Courts Continue Crackdown on New Jersey’s Truth-in-Consumer Contract, Warranty and Notice Act

Michael P. Daly, Matthew J. Fedor, Andrew L. Van Houter, and Jenna M. Poligo | Drinker Biddle

A year ago we predicted an explosion of “gotcha” class actions targeting website terms of use under the New Jersey Truth-in-Consumer Contract, Warranty and Notice Act (“TCCWNA”). That prediction has been borne out, as the past year has seen dozens of complaints and an untold number of demand letters threatening potentially annihilating aggregate statutory damages arising from arguable violations that caused no harm to the plaintiffs or anyone else.

Read more.

 

Follow @NJCivilJustice on Twitter for even more news.

 

NJ’s Discovery Rule Means A Two Year Statute Of Limitations Is Quite Fair

March 10, 2017News, Top StoriesStatute of Limitations, Trial LawyersNJCJI

An article in the latest edition of the business newspaper NJBIZ highlights a disagreement between lawyers that has delayed an important change to our civil justice system for nearly a decade. As the article explains, plaintiffs’ attorneys have protested attempts by the New Jersey State Bar Association and other non-legal professional associations to standardize the statute of limitations in professional malpractice cases.

 

The State Bar and other professional organizations want to make the statute of limitations for all sorts of professional malpractice cases two years. Right now the length of time one has to sue a professional varies by industry.

 

Plaintiffs’ attorneys argue that shortening the statute of limitations will prevent people from seeking justice, but at the same time they also claim, somewhat incongruously, that changing the law will result in more frivolous suits being filed.

 

NJCJI President Marcus Rayner rebuts this argument by pointing out that proposed reforms would keep New Jersey’s generous “discovery rule” in place, which ensures injured parties have enough time to fully vet and bring cases:

 

The discovery rule makes it so that, if a person was not aware that he or she had a cause for a malpractice claim, the statute of limitations is not imposed until the person could have reasonably discovered it. As the bill is written, the rule still applies with the shorter statute of limitations.

 

“Two years is ample, considering that,” Rayner said.

 

Rayner also pointed out that lawyers in New Jersey are much more likely than those in other states to file a claim with a malpractice insurer. He believes the longer statute of limitations contributes to New Jersey’s excessive malpractice litigation.

 

The article goes on to explain the impact our state’s current law has had on malpractice insurance rates, which are much costlier here than in our neighboring states:

 

New York and Pennsylvania have three-year and two-year statutes of limitations, respectively, for claims based in tort. Both states apply the discovery rule as well.

 

When measured in terms of malpractice insurance, the impact of this is that New Jersey’s rates are anywhere from 46 to 69 percent above those in New York, depending on the size of the firm, according to the bar association. Compared with Pennsylvania, New Jersey’s insurance rates range from 17 to 40 percent higher.

 

In short, supporters make the case that getting this legislation enacted after an almost decade-long fight for it would make malpractice insurance more affordable for small professional service firms with already-limited resources.

 

NJCJI will continue to work with the State Bar Association and other professional organizations to advocate for reasonable statute of limitations. People who have worked hard to earn a professional degree should not be priced out of the market because a certain class of attorneys wants to protect their bottom line.

 

Click here to read the full article in NJBIZ (subscription required). 

 

Click here to learn more about how NJCJI is working to make sure our state’s statutes of limitations are reasonable. 

 

Top News Clips for the Week of December 3-9

December 9, 2016News, Recent NewsClass Actions, Legal Reform, Trial LawyersNJCJI

A selection of the need-to-know civil justice news for the week of December 3-9. Continue reading →

Top News Clips for the Week of October 29-November 4

November 4, 2016News, Recent NewsClass Actions, Outrageous Lawsuits, Trial LawyersNJCJI

A selection of the need-to-know civil justice news for the week of October 29-November 4.

 

Gulfport Attorney Sues Popeyes After Choking On Chicken

WLOX

A Gulfport attorney who said he choked on a piece of Popeyes’ fried chicken last year believes a plastic knife could have prevented all his pain and suffering. Now he’s suing to get plastic knives included in all drive-thru orders and monetary compensation for himself.

Read more.

 

Companies Face Lawsuits Over Website Accessibility For Blind Users

Sara Randazzo | Wall Street Journal

The disability lawsuits started hitting the Pittsburgh federal courthouse last July, all claiming corporations’ websites violated the law by not being accessible to the blind. The first round came against household names such as Foot Locker Inc., Toys “R” Us, Brooks Brothers Group Inc., and the National Basketball Association. Later suits targeted lesser-known retailers including Family Video Movie Club Inc. and Rue21 Inc.

Read more.

 

Law Firm ‘Bonuses’ Tied To Political Donations

Andrea Estes and Viveca Novak | The Boston Globe

Jon Tester didn’t come all the way from Montana for the scrambled eggs and bacon. The US senator, virtually unknown in Boston, was in a conference room at the Thornton Law Firm that June morning to cash in at one of the most reliable stops on the Democratic fund-raising circuit, a law firm that pours millions into the coffers of the party and its politicians. Tester, a massive, jovial man who raises livestock on his family farm, was more compelling than many of the other breakfast guests, all of them political candidates the firm hoped would defend the interests of trial attorneys. But the drill was basically the same. The personal injury lawyers listened politely for a few minutes, then returned to their offices. And Tester walked away with $26,400 in checks.

Read more.

 

NJ Atty Urges 3rd Circ. To Rethink Frivolity Sanctions

Jeannie O’Sullivan | Law360

A New Jersey attorney asked the Third Circuit on Friday to rethink frivolous-appeal sanctions it affirmed after it dismissed the pro se class action he’d filed over fish-oil supplements, arguing that his case was ripe for reconsideration because the appeals court adopted different reasoning than the district court.

Read more.

 

From Police Shootings to Playground Injuries, Lawsuits Drain Cities’ Budgets

Mike Maciag | Governing

In large cities across the country, court challenges can be a drain on municipal coffers. To gauge the fiscal impact of claims and lawsuits, Governing requested financial data from the two dozen largest cities in the U.S., the first such national review of comprehensive legal costs. Twenty cities responded, and their combined financial information paints a picture of just how significant these claims costs can be. All totaled, the cities paid out more than $1.2 billion in their last fiscal year.

Read more.

 

Follow @NJCivilJustice on Twitter for even more news.

 

Top News Clips for the Week of July 9-15

July 15, 2016News, Recent NewsArbitration, Legal Reform, New Jersey Courts, Outrageous Lawsuits, TCCWNA, Trial LawyersNJCJI

A selection of the need-to-know civil justice news for the week of July 9-15. Continue reading →

Top News Clips for the Week of June 18-24

June 24, 2016News, Recent NewsNew Jersey Courts, Outrageous Lawsuits, TCCWNA, Trial LawyersNJCJI

A selection of the need-to-know civil justice news for the week of June 18-24. Continue reading →

Posts navigation

← Older posts

Newsletter Sign Up




© 2022 NJCJI. All rights reserved.

Follow us on:

  • twitter
  • linkedin

TWITTER FEED TWITTER FEED

  • Institute for Legal Reform Releases Update on Third-Party Litigation Funding https://t.co/UQDqeUQ712, Apr 15
  • The American Tort Reform Association issued a report about the National Association of Attorneys General. https://t.co/14sYVCKPrY, Apr 8
  • SCOTUS Hears Oral Argument in Arbitration Case https://t.co/KaezBQtPod, Apr 1
  • Merck Wins Dismissal in Fosamax Lawsuits https://t.co/3qUsGZzL0x, Mar 25
  • NJ Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument from NJCJI in Important Independent Contractor Case https://t.co/K7g6yHgyO9… https://t.co/XMmoLpIj10, Mar 18

    QUICK CONTACT



    Please enter the code as shown below

    captcha

    New Jersey Civil Justice Institute | 112 West State Street, Trenton, NJ 08608 | office: (609) 218-6331 | info@civiljusticenj.org