'And it's one thing to delegate a proposed order that is a ministerial two-page order.

What you can't do is fail to share it and fail to give an opportunity to respond,' Frank said. 'There's nothing wrong with delegating a proposed order. In a phone interview following the 11th Circuit decision, Frank said that he plans to seek a rehearing of the case in front of an en banc 11th Circuit.

Martin nonetheless noted that 'judicial ghostwriting remains most unwelcome in this circuit.' She urged the federal court in Georgia to reconsider a local rule under which judges' oral orders are prepared in writing by an attorney for the prevailing party. 'There is also no question the District Court was an active arbiter of this litigation and had great command of the proceedings,' wrote Martin. Martin noted that the judge fielded Frank's objections during a fairness hearing and at one point amended the approval order at the behest of another challenger to the settlement - evidence that the process was handled with care. Unpersuaded, Martin wrote that Frank and other settlement objectors had their chance to challenge the process when the federal judge discussed in open court how he would delegate the writing of the order. It was a 'fundamentally unfair process' that warrants tossing the settlement out, Frank argued. He argued the sprawling legal document was not made available for review until the judge made the settlement final. 'We are obviously pleased with the 11th Circuit's rejection of the objectors' arguments on appeal, and hopeful that the objectors will heed the court's direction that they do not attempt to further delay or prevent the settlement from taking effect,' the attorneys said.Īmong the objectors was tort reform attorney Ted Frank, founder of the Center for Class Action Fairness, who argued the case before the 11th Circuit alongside a handful of other appellants.įrank said that the federal judge who signed off on the settlement allowed class counsel to 'ghost write' the settlement approval order. Martin noted that the settlement had a high participation rate and that less than 400 people out of the 147-million-person class filed objections.Ĭlass counsel Amy Keller, Kenneth Canfield and Norman Siegel released a statement to Courthouse News hailing the decision. Circuit Judge Beverly Martin, a Barack Obama appointee, the 11th Circuit's decision rejected an appeal challenging the landmark settlement's approval. Rehearing petitions and other legal action by those objecting to the settlement could hold up the distribution for months.Īn extended claims submission period is scheduled to last through January 22, 2024. The settlement benefits will not be distributed, however, until court proceedings are complete. Other benefits for affected consumers include credit monitoring, identity protection services, as well as reimbursement for time spent addressing identity theft concerns. The deal is supposed to provide up to $20,000 per person for out-of-pocket losses linked to the breach. The breach compromised an estimated 147 million people's data, including social security numbers and addresses. consumers whose personal information was exposed in a cyberattack on the credit bureau Equifax. class action settlement over a consumer data breach, rejecting a bevy of challenges to the $380 million deal.įinalized in January 2020, the settlement compensates U.S. (CN) - A three-judge panel for the 11th Circuit on Thursday upheld the largest-ever U.S.

Equifax data breach settlement 2021