In re Cendant Corp. Litigation
| Decision Date | 11 February 1992 |
| Citation | 264 F.3d 201 |
| Parties | (3rd Cir. 2001) IN RE: CENDANT CORPORATION LITIGATION, JOANNE A. ABOFF FAMILY TRUST, U/A DATED |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
On Appeal From the United States District Court For the District of New Jersey District Judge: Honorable William H. Walls (D.C. Civ. No. 98-CV-01664) [Copyrighted Material Omitted]
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Howard B. Sirota, (Argued) Sirota & Sirota 110 Wall Street New York, NY 10005, Counsel for Appellant Joanne A. Aboff Family Trust
Edward W. Cochran, (Argued) Cochran & Cochran 2872 Broxton Road Shaker Heights, OH 44120, Frank H.
Tomlinson, Pritchard, McCall & Jones 505 North 20th Street, Suite 800 Birmingham, AL 35203, Paul S. Rothstein, 626 Northeast First Street Gainesville, FL 32601, Counsel for Appellant Betty Duncan
C. Benjamin Nutley, (Argued) Kendrick & Nutley 468 North Camden Drive, Suite 200 Beverly Hills, CA 90210, Richard Galex, Galex, Tortoreti & Tomes 150 Tices Lane East Brunswick, NJ 08816, Counsel for Appellant Tere Throenle
Gerald W. Palmer, (Argued) Ricky L. Shackelford, Eugenia L. Castruccio, Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue 555 West Fifth Street, Suite 4600 Los Angeles, CA 90013, Counsel for Appellants Robert and Janice Davidson
Lawrence W. Schonbrun, (Argued) Law Office of Lawrence W. Schonbrun 86 Eucalyptus Road Berkeley, CA 94705, Counsel for Appellant Faye Schonbrunn
John Halebian, (Argued) Wechsler, Harwood, Halebian & Feffer 488 Madison Avenue, 8th Floor New York, NY 10022, Kenneth A. Elan, Law Offices of Kenneth A. Elan 217 Broadway New York, NY 10007, Counsel for Appellant Ann Mark
Michael D. Hess, Leonard J. Koerner, Lorna B. Goodman, Elizabeth S. Natrella, (Argued) Leslie Conason, Corporation Counsel of the City of New York New York City Law Department 100 Church Street New York, NY 10007, Counsel for Appellants New York City Pension Funds
Max W. Berger, Daniel L. Berger, (Argued) Jeffrey N. Leibell, Bernstein, Litowitz, Berger, & Grossman, LLP 1285 Avenue of the Americas, 33rd Floor New York, NY 10019, Leonard Barrack, Gerald J. Rodos, Jeffrey W. Golan, Barrack, Rodos, & Bacine 3300 Two Commerce Square 2001 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19103, Counsel for Appellees California Public Employees' Retirement System, New York State Common Retirement Fund and The New York City Pension Funds
Arthur R. Miller, (Argued) 228 Harvard Law School Langdell West Areeda Hall 225 1565 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, Counsel for Appellees Barrack, Rodos, & Bacine and Bernstein, Litowitz, Berger & Grossmann, LLP
Alan N. Salpeter, (Argued) Michele Odorizzi, Caryn L. Jacobs, Mayer, Brown & Platt 190 South LaSalle Street Chicago, IL 60603-3441, Douglas S. Eakley, Peter L. Skolnik, Lowenstein, Sandler, PC 65 Livingston Avenue Roseland, NJ 07068, Kathryn A. Oberly, Robert G. Cohen, William P. Hammer, Jr., Ernst & Young, LLP 787 Seventh Avenue New York, NY 10019-6018, Counsel for Appellee Ernst & Young, LLP
Carl Greenberg, Michael M. Rosenbaum, Budd, Larner, Gross, Rosenbaum, Greenberg & Sade 150 John F. Kennedy Parkway CN 1000 Short Hills, NJ 07078-0999, Samuel Kadet, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom Four Times Square New York, NY 10036, Counsel for Appellee Cendant Corporation
Herbert J. Stern, Stern, Greenberg & Kilcullen 75 Livingston Avenue Roseland, NH 07068, Counsel for Appellee James E. Buckman
David M. Becker, General Counsel Meyer Eisenberg, Deputy General Counsel Eric Summergrad, Deputy Solicitor Luis DE LA Torre, (Argued) Special Counsel Nathan A. Forrester, Senior Counsel Securities and Exchange Commission 450 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20549-0606, Counsel for Amicus Curiae Securities and Exchange Commission
Joseph A. Grundfest, The William A. Franke Professor of Law and Business Stanford Law School Crown Quadrangle 559 Nathan Abbott Way Stanford, CA 94305-8610, Melanie M. Piech, Lieff, Cabraser, Heimann & Bernstein, LLP 275 Battery Street, 30th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111, Counsel for Amicus Curiae Barclays Global Investors, N.A., Franklin Resources, Inc., New Hampshire Retirement System and Public Employees' Retirement Association of Colorado
Before: Becker, Chief Judge, Sloviter and Ambro, Circuit Judges.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re Enron Corp. Securities, MDL-1446.
...method to fees as long as the result does not exceed a reasonable percentage of the class recovery. See, e.g., In re Cendant Corp. Litig., 264 F.3d 201, 284-85 (3d Cir.2001) (citing H.R. Conf. Rep. 104-369) ("By not fixing the percentage of fees and costs counsel may receive, the Conference......
-
Ehrheart v. Wireless
...of the class from unjust or unfair settlements. See In re AT & T Corp., 455 F.3d 160, 175 (3d Cir.2006) (quoting In re Cendant Corp. Litig., 264 F.3d 201, 231 (3d Cir.2001)). Here, the District Court never considered whether to approve the settlement because, citing the Clarification Act, t......
-
In re Rent-Way Securities Litigation, Civil Action 00-323 Erie.
...Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. Lafferty & Co., Inc., 267 F.3d 340, 358 (3d Cir.2001); see also In re Cendant Corp. Litig., 264 F.3d 201, 232 (3d Cir.2001); Plaintiffs' Memorandum of Law in Opposition to the Motions to Dismiss Filed by Rent-Way, Morgenstern, Conway, McDonnell a......
-
Sullivan v. DB Invs., Inc., s. 08–2784
...that the settlement was fair, reasonable, and adequate” is likewise reviewed for abuse of discretion. In re Cendant Corp. Litig., 264 F.3d 201, 231 (3d Cir.2001).III. Discussion At issue on appeal is the District Court's approval of the class settlement agreement and certification of the In......
-
Class Certification In Securities Fraud Actions: A View From The Second Circuit
...are often addressed by creating subclasses to divide the issues and keep arguments focused. See, e.g., In re Cendant Corp. Litig., 264 F.3d 201, 244 n. 25 (3d Cir. 2001) (encouraging district courts to consider sub-classing and noting that it is "not inconsistent" with the PSLRA to create s......
-
William O. Fisher, Does the Efficient Market Theory Help Us Do Justice in a Time of Madness?
...expert used an event study as part of an effort to calculate losses and allocate damages in a settlement), aff'd in relevant part, 264 F.3d 201 (3d Cir. 2001). 106 Scienter is an element of a 10b-5 case, and the Supreme Court has defined that term to mean "a mental state embracing intent to......
-
Table of Cases
...1139 (9th Cir. 2000), 93, 94 Cement & Concrete Antitrust Litig., In re , 1981 WL 2039 (D. Ariz. 1981), 241 Cendant Corp. Litig., In re , 264 F.3d 201 (3d Cir. 2001), 129 Central Taxi Serv., In re , 35 B.R. 642 (S.D. Fla. 1983), 99 Chadha v. Bayer Inc (1999), 45 O.R. (3d) 29 (Can. Ont. S.C.J......
-
Class Certification Procedure
...antitrust cases). The Third Circuit has also rejected the auction method in securities cases under the PSLRA. In re Cendant Corp. Litig., 264 F.3d 201, 273-74 (3d Cir. 2001). 116 Class Actions Handbook they can be problematic. Cheaper lawyers may not make better lawyers. 106 The auction pro......
-
Short Sellers, Short Squeezes, and Securities Fraud.
...court chooses the lead plaintiff, the lead plaintiff has the right to "select and retain" class counsel. See In re Cendant Corp. Litig., 264 F.3d 201, 222-23 (3d Cir. 2001) (holding that the trial court could not use an auction to select lead counsel). Therefore, applications to be lead pla......