In re: Pre-Filled Propane Tank Marketing and Sales Prac. Litig. (Amerigas Settlement)

Case # 09-md-02086
Case Name In re: Pre-Filled Propane Tank Marketing and Sales Prac. Litig. (Amerigas Settlement)
Jurisdiction US District Court for W.D. MO
Summary

Defendants Ferrellgas (d/b/a Blue Rhino) and Amerigas retail pre-filled propane tanks at numerous national retailers. Beginning in 2000, these propane tanks were filled with 17 pounds of propane and marketed as full. In approximately July 2008, the Defendants began filling their tanks with 15 pounds of propane (instead of 17 pounds) but did not change the price of the product, nor make clear to the customer that the amount of propane they were receiving had diminished.

Plaintiffs allege that, by colluding with their competitors, Defendants are guilty of anti-trust violations.

NOTE: This page is related to the In re: Pre-Filled Propane Tank Marketing and Sales Prac. Litig. (Ferrellgas Settlement) page.

Final Approval Date 10/06/2010
Result
  1. Final Approval granted.
  2. Both Objectors appealed the Final Approval.
  3. Appeal was voluntarily dismissed.
  4. Per the Declaration of Norman Siegel (Plaintiff's attorney), the Objectors were paid $17,750 by both the Plaintiff and the Defendant in exchange for dropping their appeal (See Paragraph 7 of Declaration)
Dismissal of Last Appeal 02/22/2011
Attachments Class Action Complaint.pdf
Preliminary Approval.pdf
Plaintiff's Response to Objections.pdf
Final Approval.pdf
Final Judgement.pdf
Order Granting Attorneys' Fees.pdf
Dismissal of Appeal of Girator and Barginear Objectors.pdf
Declaration of Norman Siegel re Objector Pay-off.pdf
Docket Report.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Patrick Giratos

Objectors Patrick Giratos
Signers Jonathan E. Fortman
Attorneys Jonathan E. Fortman
Summary
  1. The settlement is illusory, since the Defendant is only obligated to pay $5 million.
  2. The settlement unfairly allows unclaimed funds to revert to the Defendant.
  3. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
  4. Motion for Attorneys' Fees was unopposed by Defendant, raising red flags.
  5. Attorneys' fees are awarded without regard to the actual number of claims filed.
  6. Class members are unfairly penalized by participating in a rebate program during the settlement period.
  7. Injunctive relief is illusory, since it merely requires that the Defendant follow the law.
Attachments Objection of Patrick Giratos.pdf
Appeal of Giratos and Barginear Objectors.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Wayne Barginear

Objectors Wayne Barginear
Signers Thomas L. Cox Jr.
John B. Boyd
Attorneys Thomas L. Cox Jr.
John B. Boyd
Summary
  1. Proving class membership is unfairly burdensome.
  2. Providing a receipt for purchase is unfairly burdensome on class members.
  3. Settlement unfairly burdens objectors.
  4. Requiring the submission of a proof of purchase.
  5. Requiring appearance at the Fairness Hearing.
  6. Settlement improperly directs funds to cy pres recipients.
  7. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
  8. Claim period is too short.
Attachments Objection of Wayne Barginear.pdf
Appeal of Giratos and Barginear Objectors.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated