Juhline v. Ben Bridge-Jeweler

Case # 11-cv-02906
Case Name Juhline v. Ben Bridge-Jeweler
Jurisdiction US District Court for S.D. CA

Plaintiffs contend that Ben Bridge-Jewelers made a practice of recording customers' telephone number and/or address in connection with credit card purchases they made.  Defendant recorded and stored this information in violation of the California Civil Code section 1747.08.

Final Approval Date 05/04/2015
  1. Final Approval granted.
  2. Kron objection was stricken for being filed late but in the Final Order and Judgment, the Court found that "the challenges raised do not show that the Settlement is unfair, inadequate, or unreasonable." (see Final Order, ¶5)
  3. Objector Kron (through Attorney Kurilich) appealed the Final Approval.
  4. Appeal was voluntarily dismissed.
Dismissal of Last Appeal 06/08/2015
Attachments Docket Report.pdf
Second Amended Class Action Complaint.pdf
Preliminary Approval Order.pdf
Declaration in Support of Final Approval and in Response to Objection.pdf
Final Order and Judgment.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Erika A. Kron

Objectors Erika A. Kron
Signers Erika A. Kron
Attorneys Matthew Kurilich
  1. Coupon provisions of the settlement are improper and serve as a marketing device for the Defendant.
  2. Settlement improperly provides relief along with class notice.
    • Designed to prevent careful scrutiny of the settlement by class members, since their monetary relief has already been received.
  3. Release is overbroad.
  4. Settlement value is inflated.
  5. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
  6. Class representative incentive awards are excessive.

NOTE:  This objection was filed late but was admitted by the Court, nunc pro tunc.

Attachments Objection of Erika A. Kron.pdf
Notice of Document Discrepancies Regarding Kron Objection.pdf
Appeal of Objector Kron.pdf
Kurilich Appearance for Objector-Appellant Kron.pdf
Dismissal of Kron Appeal.pdf
Kron Appeal Docket.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated