Professional objector

A "Professional Objector" is a lawyer who repeatedly files objections to various aspects of class action settlements in order to receive a payment of money in exchange for the withdrawal of the objection.

The practice of Professional Objectors has become the focus of numerous legal commentators and courts. The respected treatise Newberg on Class Actions observed that objecting to class settlements is now a “big business” and that some of these objections are “obviously ‘canned’ objections filed by professional objectors who seek out class actions to simply extract a fee by lodging generic, unhelpful protests.” UCLA law professor William Rubenstein wrote that the record of Professional Objectors “has been less than stellar. This part of the profession has arguably attracted lawyers more interested in coercing a fee than in correcting a wrong.” In the same vein, Professor Ed Brunet reported in a law review article that Professional Objectors are viewed as “warts on the class action process,” “pond scum,” and “bottom feeders.” In his article, Professor Brunet detailed the pros and cons of Professional Objectors -- noting that they “are as welcome in the courtroom as is the guest at a wedding ceremony who responds affirmatively to the minister's question, ‘Is there anyone here who opposes this marriage?'"

The adverse perception to Professional Objectors led the Federal Judicial Center to warn federal judges to “[w]atch out…for ‘canned objections filed by professional objectors." The same publication specifically advised the judges to “be wary of self-interested professional objectors who often present rote objections to class counsel’s fee requests and add little or nothing to the fee proceedings.”

Federal and state courts have also indicated a negative perspective of Professional Objectors. Judge Nancy Gertner of the District Court for Massachusetts stated that:

[P]rofessional objectors can levy what is effectively a tax on class action settlements, a tax that has no benefit to anyone other than to the objectors. Literally nothing is gained from the cost: Settlements are not restructured and the class, on whose benefit the appeal is purportedly raised, gains nothing.

In August 2009, Florida Circuit Court Judge Colby Peel found that the Professional Objectors' conduct "constituted an effort to extort money from the class and/or class counsel." Judge Peel based his conclusion on the lack of involvement and participation combined with “their attempt to inject themselves at the last minute into this eight year litigation.” Judge Peel found that the Professional Objectors “have been working through collusion for their own personal benefit and not for the benefit of this class or their clients.”

In March 2010, Nevada District Court Judge Philip Pro levied $500,000 appeal bonds on objectors represented by Christopher Bandas, Lisa Rasmussen, John Pentz, Edward Cochran, Edward Siegel and Francis Sweeney. In answering the question of whether these attorneys were "Professional objectors," Judge Pro found that the attorneys have "a documented history of filing notices of appeal from orders approving other class action settlements, and thereafter dismissing said appeals when they and their clients were compensated by the settling class or counsel for the settling class."

References