4 ms·

Except that appeals work is significantly cheaper than a large lawsuit at the district court, because it often focuses on legal error. They don't relitigate the

Except that appeals work is significantly cheaper than a large lawsuit at the district court, because it often focuses on legal error. They don't relitigate the case. You still ignored his main point, get the money now without delay and without the possibility of appeals court striking it down or lowering the amount won--if they win. Appeal after appeal can take a few years. The attorneys are not the ones agreeing to settle, and they actually can't do things without the okay of their plaintiffs. Can they "strongly suggest" it to the plaintiffs?

DannyBee 12y ago
"You still ignored his main point, get the money now without delay and without the possibility of appeals court striking it down or lowering the amount won--if they win. Appeal after appeal can take a few years." Lawyers don't get money unless clients want the money and are willing to settle. Period. The clients agree because they don't want this risk. They don't want to wait 7 years. It's easy to blame lawyers because they are essentially enablers, but ... Behind every crappy settlement is a crappy plaintiff. There may be a shady lawyer somewhere, but laying the blame solely on the lawyer is silly. For anyone who thinks the settlement is unfair, besides objecting, they can opt out. If he really thinks it is so cheap, easy, and low risk to win a lawsuit, he should do it. "The attorneys are not the ones agreeing to settle, and they actually can't do things without the okay of their plaintiffs. Can they "strongly suggest" it to the plaintiffs? " They can give their plaintiff candid advice, which is usually "This will take 3-7 years of your life, decide whether you'd rather spend that sitting in depositions or with a small amount of money" The vast majority of good class action attorneys are fine with either. They can often win much larger amounts than the settlement amounts to. No court in the world would let them drop out of the lawsuit at this point (fun fact: You can't withdraw in most cases unless the judge lets you, and the judge is not going to let you just because you didn't settle) I'm not going to claim there isn certainly a cottage industry of suing to settle in certain areas. Trotting out this lawsuit as an example of that (when for example, we still don't even know the settlement amount) seems silly.

DannyBee 12y ago

"You still ignored his main point, get the money now without delay and without the possibility of appeals court striking it down or lowering the amount won--if they win. Appeal after appeal can take a few years." Lawyers don't get money unless clients want the money and are willing to settle. Period. The clients agree because they don't want this risk. They don't want to wait 7 years. It's easy to blame lawyers because they are essentially enablers, but ... Behind every crappy settlement is a crappy plaintiff. There may be a shady lawyer somewhere, but laying the blame solely on the lawyer is silly. For anyone who thinks the settlement is unfair, besides objecting, they can opt out. If he really thinks it is so cheap, easy, and low risk to win a lawsuit, he should do it. "The attorneys are not the ones agreeing to settle, and they actually can't do things without the okay of their plaintiffs. Can they "strongly suggest" it to the plaintiffs? " They can give their plaintiff candid advice, which is usually "This will take 3-7 years of your life, decide whether you'd rather spend that sitting in depositions or with a small amount of money" The vast majority of good class action attorneys are fine with either. They can often win much larger amounts than the settlement amounts to. No court in the world would let them drop out of the lawsuit at this point (fun fact: You can't withdraw in most cases unless the judge lets you, and the judge is not going to let you just because you didn't settle) I'm not going to claim there isn certainly a cottage industry of suing to settle in certain areas. Trotting out this lawsuit as an example of that (when for example, we still don't even know the settlement amount) seems silly.