David Wolf et al v. Red Bull GMBH et al

Case # 13-cv-08008
Case Name David Wolf et al v. Red Bull GMBH et al
Jurisdiction US District Court for S.D. NY
Summary

Red Bull was marketed as being "scientifically" superior to other energy products, such as caffeine tablets or coffee. However, no scientific studies exist demonstrating that Red Bull (and other energy drinks) provide any purported benefit other than through caffeine. These misleading marketing claims created misconceptions among consumers and enriched Red Bull. 

Final Approval Date 05/12/2015
Result
  1. Final Approval granted.
  2. Attorneys' fees were reduced by $1.2 million, likely through a change in how the value of the settlement was calculated. Whether or not this was in response to an objection is not discussed in the Court Order.
  3. Objectors Dave Mager (pro se) and Paul Lopez (through Attorneys Stein and Bandas) appealed the Final Approval.
  4. Both appeals were voluntarily dismissed.
Dismissal of Last Appeal 09/30/2015
Attachments Docket Report.pdf
Class Action Complaint.pdf
Preliminary Approval.pdf
Plaintiffs' Response to Objections.pdf
Final Judgement.pdf
Memorandum of Law in Support of Attorneys' Fees.pdf
Final Order Granting Attorneys' Fees.pdf
Appeal Docket.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Barry Waterman

Objectors Barry Waterman
Signers Barry Waterman
Attorneys
Summary
  1. Lawsuit is frivolous.
  2. Consumers should be responsible for their own actions.
  3. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
Attachments Objection of Barry Waterman.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Chad Farmer

Objectors Chad Farmer
Signers Chad Farmer
Attorneys
Summary
  1. Objection procedures are overly burdensome.
  2. Service list is too long.
  3. Settlement provides no relief.
  4. Compensation in products is unfair to the class.
  5. Information made available to the class is insufficient.
  6. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
Attachments Objection of Chad Farmer.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Christopher Andrews

Objectors Christopher Andrews
Signers Christopher Andrews
Attorneys
Summary
  1. Settlement amount appears too low.
  2. Value of product relief is artificially inflated.
  3. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
  4. Cy pres program unfairly directs settlement funds away from the class.
Attachments Objection of Christopher Andrews.pdf
Objection of Christopher Andrews (Supplement).pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Dave Mager

Objectors Dave Mager
Signers Dave Mager
Attorneys
Summary
  1. Class members should be compensated based on the number of products they purchased during the class period.
  2. Class members should have more time to cash their checks.
  3. Cy pres program unfairly directs settlement funds away from the class.
  4. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
Attachments Objection of Dave Mager.pdf
Appeal of Objector Dave Mager.pdf
Dismissal of Mager Appeal.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Jonathan Corbett

Objectors Jonathan Corbett
Signers Jonathan Corbett
Attorneys
Summary
  1. Settlement is frivolous.
  2. Any consumers who were mislead should be personally liable for that.
  3. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
Attachments Objection of Jonathan Corbett.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Lawrence Montecalvo

Objectors Lawrence Montecalvo
Signers Lawrence Montecalvo
Attorneys
Summary
  1. Release is overbroad.
  2. Cy pres program unfairly directs settlement funds away from the class.
  3. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
  4. Class representative incentive awards are excessive.
Attachments Objection of Lawrence Montecalvo.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Michael Narkin

Objectors Michael Narkin
Signers Michael Narkin
Attorneys
Summary
  1. Settlement does not demonstrate the link between damages and relief.
  2. Class counsel may be colluding with Defendants.
  3. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
  4. Settlement does not protect sub-classes who may have other claims.
  5. Cy pres provisions are improper.
Attachments Objection of Michael Narkin.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Theodore H. Frank

Objectors Theodore H. Frank
Signers Theodore H. Frank
Attorneys Erin Sheley
Summary
  1. "Clear sailing" provisions are improper.
  2. Attorneys' fees are excessive and improperly calculated.
  3. Release is overbroad.
  4. Cy pres program does not identify potential recipients.
  5. Class does not meet commonality requirements.
Attachments Objection of Theodore Frank.pdf
Sheley Appearance for Objector Frank.pdf
Declaration of Theodore Frank.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Paul J. Lopez

Objectors Paul J. Lopez
Signers David Stein
Attorneys David Stein
Christopher A. Bandas
Summary
  1. Claims process is burdensome and unfairly short.
  2. Objection deadline is prior to deadline for proposed attorneys' fees.
  3. Class members should be compensated based on the number of products purchased during the class period.
  4. Settlement overstates relief available to the class.
  5. Attorneys' fees are excessive and rely on improper "clear sailing provisions."

NOTE: Christopher Bandas filed his appearance on the Appeal.

Attachments Objection of Paul J. Lopez.pdf
Appeal of Objector Lopez.pdf
Bandas Appearance for Objector-Appellant Lopez.pdf
Dismissal of Lopez Appeal.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated