Serial Objectors Testify that Their Objections are Self-Serving

Posted on 11 January 2017.

In a force-placed insurance class action suit, Amirali and Janet Jabrani (who have teamed up with Christopher A. Bandas to object in five cases), class counsel deposed the Jabranis.   Mr. Jabrani testified that he had also objected in two other force-placed insurance cases with Mr. Bandas (Fladell v. Wells Fargo and Hamilton v. Suntrust Mortgage).  When pressed, Mr. Jabrani could not cite any improvements to those settlements beyond an increased payment to himself, which came directly from Mr. Bandas.

A: It improved my case, I know that. It improved my personal settlement amount.
Q: By getting more money?
A. By getting more money than what Wells Fargo was going to give.
Q. So the Wells Fargo settlement was improved because Mr. Jabrani got more money in
his pocket?
A. That's right.
Q. The SunTrust deal settlement was improved because, again, you, Mr. Jabrani, got more
money than you would have gotten, right?
A. That's right.
Q. Is there any other way, to your knowledge, that the SunTrust and the Wells Fargo
settlements were improved for anybody else?

A. I was not made aware of it.
(Amirali Jabrani Deposition Transcript., 1/5/16, 28: 2-25)

Self-serving objections like these, wherein the only beneficiary of the objection is the objector (and likely, their counsel) demonstrate the problem of serial objectors.  Settlement payments are delayed and class members and class counsel suffer while objectors exact an increased payment for themselves.