Frank v. Poertner
Certiorari Denied
Petition for certiorari denied on March 21, 2016.
Issue
(1) Whether, or in what circumstances, a settlement that provides a disproportionate allocation of its pecuniary benefit to class counsel is "fair, reasonable, and adequate," under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(2); and (2) whether, or in what circumstances, the use of a cy pres remedy in lieu of attempting further distributions to actual class members is "fair, reasonable, and adequate," under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(2).
Oct 1, 2015Application (15A345) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from October 14, 2015 to November 13, 2015, submitted to Justice Thomas.
Oct 2, 2015Application (15A345) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until November 13, 2015.
Nov 3, 2015Application (15A345) to extend further the time from November 13, 2015 to December 11, 2015, submitted to Justice Thomas.
Nov 5, 2015Application (15A345) granted by Justice Thomas extending the time to file until December 11, 2015.
Dec 11, 2015Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due January 14, 2016)
Dec 21, 2015Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the class respondents.
Jan 11, 2016Order extending time to file response to petition to and including February 16, 2016, for all respondents.
Jan 13, 2016Brief amicus curiae of New Jersey Civil Justice Institute filed.
Jan 14, 2016Brief amicus curiae of Cato Institute filed.
Jan 14, 2016Brief amicus curiae of Truth In Advertising, Inc. filed.
Feb 16, 2016Brief of respondents Joshua D. Poertner, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated in opposition filed.
Feb 16, 2016Brief of respondents The Gillette Company and the Procter & Gamble Company in opposition filed.
Mar 1, 2016Reply of petitioner Theodore H. Frank filed.
Mar 2, 2016DISTRIBUTED for Conference of March 18, 2016.
Mar 21, 2016Petition DENIED. Justice Alito took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Recommended Citation: Frank v. Poertner, SCOTUSblog, https://www.scotusblog.com/cases/frank-v-poertner/