Retailer TJX (Marshall’s, Bob’s, TJ Maxx, etc.), facing lawsuits following its exposure of more than 45 million customer records in a gigantic credit-card security breach, has agreed with class-action lawyers to a settlement that includes, among other concessions, the holding of “Customer Appreciation” sale events at its stores. Ten state attorneys general have now objected to the deal, pointing out that store sale events can and routinely do work to the benefit of the retailer and not just the buyer. Massachusetts AG Martha Coakley’s “objection was not so much with the sale itself, but with having it included as a part of the official settlement. The difference? If it’s in the official settlement, it increases how much money the consumer lawyers involved in the case get for their fee.” (Evan Schuman, “Massachusetts AG Slams TJX Consumer Settlement Sale”, EWeek, Nov. 19; Mark Jewell, “Coakley not excited about TJX’s plan for repayment”, AP/Worcester Telegram, Nov. 21; John O’Brien, “Ten AGs don’t want class action attorneys fees boosted by sale”, LegalNewsLine, Nov. 20; Keith Regan, “TJX to Shell Out $41M in Data Breach Settlement”, E-Commerce Times, Nov. 30).
AGs: Don’t count sale as class-action remedy
Retailer TJX (Marshall’s, Bob’s, TJ Maxx, etc.), facing lawsuits following its exposure of more than 45 million customer records in a gigantic credit-card security breach, has agreed with class-action lawyers to a settlement that includes, among other concessions, the holding of “Customer Appreciation” sale events at its stores. Ten state attorneys general have now objected […]
One Comment
[…] …and the judge hearing an attorneys’-fee petition in the TJX credit-card data-breach case reasoned that the lawyers didn’t really deserve $6.5 million in fees for achieving that result. The lawyers proposed, but the judge was unimpressed with, a theory that their suit had “made available” $200 million to the class, even if few class members stopped by to pick it up. Such sticklers, these judges can be. (Beck and Herrmann, Nov. 11). Related: Dec. 4, 2007. […]