Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement
1–10 of 37 posts
Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement
#2I'm glad that Michael Devine has the courage to turn down the settlement. I think it helps that there seems to be clear evidence of wrongdoing.
Also, maybe I am misunderstanding something, but does the plaintiff have to ask for the settlement to be rejected?
I thought that for a settlement to go through, all parties have to agree, otherwise it goes to court.
Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement
#3I'm glad that Michael Devine has the courage to turn down the settlement. I think it helps that there seems to be clear evidence of wrongdoing. Also, maybe I am misunderstanding something, but does the plaintiff have to ask for the settlement to be rejected? I thought that for a settlement to go through, all parties have to agree, otherwise it goes to court.
I'm not sure if being one of the named plaintiffs matters once it is certified as a class. He can probably opt out of the class though, just like any other member.
Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement
#4I'm glad that Michael Devine has the courage to turn down the settlement. I think it helps that there seems to be clear evidence of wrongdoing. Also, maybe I am misunderstanding something, but does the plaintiff have to ask for the settlement to be rejected? I thought that for a settlement to go through, all parties have to agree, otherwise it goes to court.
Tobacco class actions offer some examples about what happens when sections of the class disagree (at least settle early): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_Master_Settlement_Agree...
Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement
#5The money quote from the plaintiff...
""As an analogy," Devine wrote, "if a shoplifter is caught on video stealing a $400 iPad from the Apple Store, would a fair and just resolution be for the shoplifter to pay Apple $40, keep the iPad, and walk away with no record or admission of wrongdoing? Of course not.""
Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement
#6I'm glad that Michael Devine has the courage to turn down the settlement. I think it helps that there seems to be clear evidence of wrongdoing. Also, maybe I am misunderstanding something, but does the plaintiff have to ask for the settlement to be rejected? I thought that for a settlement to go through, all parties have to agree, otherwise it goes to court.
Class action lawsuits are either opt-out (23b3) or in some cases (23b1-2) mandatory with no choice but to be bound. This is especially problematic because the actor in the driver's seat -- the lawyers that bring the suits -- have very different incentives from thier nominal clients. In fact, thier incentives are more closely aligned with the defendant. The defendant wants a quick resolution and global peace, the lawyers want a quick resolution and a large fee, so the settlements tend to offer global peace for a large fee. The class gets worthless injunctive relief, or a coupon, or a charity of the lawyers' choice gets some money, or maybe class members get $10 each but only if they fill out a bunch of paperwork. Class actions rarely ever go to trial. In theory the judge is supposed to protect absent class members but usually they act as a rubber stamp.
Class actions do not comport with due process and should be abolished. If lawyers want to bring mass tort suits let them sign up clients.
Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement
#7Considering the severity of what was done (basically, keeping down the salaries of everyone in the industry), this is good news.
Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement
#8I am under the impression that the information that this suit could have revealed about Mr Jobs' character was potentially far more damaging than any settlement or award the defendants might have to pay.
To put it another way, I get the impression that settlement here is primarily for PR damage control, and only secondarily for limiting what the defendants must ultimately pay.
Does this idea have any support? If I am wrong, please tell me why.
Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement
#9I am under the impression that the information that this suit could have revealed about Mr Jobs' character was potentially far more damaging than any settlement or award the defendants might have to pay. To put it another way, I get the impression that settlement here is primarily for PR damage control, and only secondarily for limiting what the defendants must ultimately pay. Does this idea have any support? If I am…
If I am wrong, please tell me why.
I don't think your necessarily wrong that it would make him look bad, but it would have to be some really extraordinary revelations to make his character look worse than he already does. Maybe it would mean more widespread exposure of his real character, but for all the praise that can be thrown at him, anyone paying attention is already aware he was an all-around petulant asshole willing to act immorally and illegally to get his way.
Re: Plaintiff in tech hiring suit asks judge to reject settlement
#10I'm glad that Michael Devine has the courage to turn down the settlement. I think it helps that there seems to be clear evidence of wrongdoing. Also, maybe I am misunderstanding something, but does the plaintiff have to ask for the settlement to be rejected? I thought that for a settlement to go through, all parties have to agree, otherwise it goes to court.
Class action lawsuits are either opt-out (23b3) or in some cases (23b1-2) mandatory with no choice but to be bound. This is especially problematic because the actor in the driver's seat -- the lawyers that bring the suits -- have very different incentives from thier nominal clients. In fact, thier incentives are more closely aligned with the defendant. The defendant wants a quick resolution and global peace, the lawy…
Wow, does your last sentence turn 180 from the (otherwise excellent) analysis. If class actions don't help plaintiffs enough, shouldn't we be looking for a stronger solution?