Critical Mass: Plaintiffs Question Whether Defendant 'Geo-fenced' Roundup Jurors. Plus: Yahoo Data Breach Settlement Value Grows
Plaintiffs lawyers in the third Roundup trial have accused the corporate owners of the weed-killer brand of sending targeted ads to jurors
April 10, 2019 at 12:41 PM
6 minute read
Welcome to Critical Mass, Law.com's weekly briefing for class action and mass tort attorneys. Here's what's going on this week: Plaintiffs lawyers in the third Roundup trial have accused Monsanto of sending targeted ads to jurors. Lawyers take another stab at securing approval for the Yahoo data breach settlement. Also, as the fight escalates over transvaginal mesh fees, who's set to receive the most?
Send your feedback to [email protected], or find me on Twitter: @abronstadlaw
Is Monsanto Geo-Tracking Roundup Jurors?
The stakes are high — and so is the media attention — in the third trial over Monsanto's Roundup brand weed-killer. So when Monsanto (now, after its acquisition, part of Bayer AG) paid for a full-page ad in The Wall Street Journal on the first day of voir dire, plaintiffs' attorneys brought a motion for a temporary injunction to bar it from paying for ads that tout the safety of its herbicide. Alameda County Superior Court Judge Winifred Smith seemed disinclined to infringe on free-speech protections of the First Amendment, and rejected the motion on Thursday. She also noted that plaintiffs' attorneys had run their own ads – a point emphasized by Monsanto in its opposition filing.
But she had questions when plaintiffs' attorneys brought up another kind of advertising in court: geofencing. What is that? According to transcripts of last week's hearing, Steven Brady (Brady Law Group) explained: “They put in particular longitude and latitude coordinates and they pump advertisements to apps that are on the phones of people within those coordinates.”
In this case, the courthouse in Oakland, California. That's jury tampering, R. Brent Wisner (Baum Hedlund) argued to the judge. And it happened in the first trial, he said:
“Numerous jurors during voir dire mentioned that they were having these things pushed on them as soon as they walked in the building.”
Smith however, refused to grant the motion, stating in her order:
“The court is not persuaded that the alleged geomarketing is materially different from carrying signs outside a courthouse or carrying placards or wearing buttons inside a courtroom or that it requires a different judicial response.”
Bayer praised the ruling: “Bayer's Roundup advertising is national in scope and the company is not running advertising that singles out the greater S.F./Oakland market or any part of it.”
Yahoo Settlement Now Worth $117.5M
If at first you don't succeed, try, try again — that's the refrain heard by lawyers whose $85 million class action over Yahoo's recent data breaches got an “F” from U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh a few months back. Early on Tuesday, they filed a new deal worth $117.5 million, according to my story.
Here's what changed: The fund to reimburse out-of-pocket costsincreased from $50 million to $55 million. Attorney fees dropped from $35 million to $30 million. The class definition expanded to include Yahoo account holders from 2012. And the new deal includes an information security budget at Yahoo of more than $300 million over the next four years, with 200 people involved.
Many of the changes appear to address concerns Koh had about the original deal, as well as the new class action settlement guidelines that became effective in the Northern District of California on Nov. 1 (check out this nifty chart comparing the Yahoo deal's details to data breach settlements with Home Depot and Anthem).
But will it be enough? After all, Koh questioned why the case involved 32 plaintiffs' law firms with a lodestar estimate of $22 million. The new deal has this attached lodestar calculation of $22 million — for 31 law firms.
Allegations Fly in Fight Over Mesh Litigation Fees
The explosive fight over common benefit fees in the transvaginal mesh litigation took another turn on Monday when the chairman of the fee and cost committee fired back at four law firms objecting to their share of the estimated $550 million pie. Henry Garrard (Blasingame Burch) accused the objecting firms of making false attacks and, in some cases, submitting applications “riddled with excessive entries, duplicate billing,” and other problems. My story comes with this comprehensive chart of all the firms planned to get common benefit fees from transvaginal mesh, the biggest mass tort in the country. Of note: the top five firms, totaling 40% of the fees, all have lawyers on the fee and cost committee.
|Here's what else you need to know:
Chrysler Cost: Fiat Chrysler agreed this week to a tentative $110 million settlement with a class of investors over its “clean diesel” emissions scandal. The deal follows an $800 million class action settlement involving consumers and government regulators, reached earlier this year, over its “EcoDiesel” vehicles. The suit was filed in 2015, just after Chrysler agreed to pay a record $105 million fine to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration over safety recalls.
Talc Turnaround? Johnson & Johnson scored another defense win in ongoing litigation over whether its talcum powder products caused mesothelioma. Bloomberg reported on the April 5 verdict in a case brought by plaintiff Robert Blinkinsop, a California man represented by Weitz & Luxenberg, who was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2017. King & Spalding led the defense in that trial, which provided the “fourth verdict in favor of Johnson & Johnson in recent months,” according to spokeswoman Kim Montagnino. Others were in New Jersey and California.
All Things Being Unequal: A pair of new pay equity class actions dropped last week, including a $200 million lawsuit alleging a “fraternity culture” at Jones Day. Law.com reported that Sanford Heisler, which has brought pay equity suits against other law firms, filed the suit. Here's another Law.com article featuring two of the plaintiffs behind the suit, and Jones Day's response to the suit. Another pay equity class action was filed against Walt Disney Studios, alleging women at The Walt Disney Co. division are treated as “cheap labor.” Lori Andrus (Andrus Anderson), who settled a pay equity suit against Farmers Insurance for $5.9 million, filed that case.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1How Cybercriminals Exploit Law Firms’ Holiday Vulnerabilities
- 2DOJ Asks 5th Circuit to Publish Opinion Upholding Gun Ban for Felon
- 3GEO Group Sued Over 2 Wrongful Deaths
- 4Revenue Up at Homegrown Texas Firms Through Q3, Though Demand Slipped Slightly
- 5Warner Bros. Accused of Misleading Investors on NBA Talks
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250