Fladell v. Wells Fargo Bank

Case # 13-cv-60721
Case Name Fladell v. Wells Fargo Bank
Jurisdiction US District Court for S.D. FL
Summary

Plaintiffs allege that Defendant (Wells Fargo) conspired to inflate premiums on insurance policies. They seek to recover these improper charges, which constituted "breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty, tortious interference with a contract or advantageous business relationship, and violations of the federal Truth in Lending Act, Bank Holding Company Act, and Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act" (Complaint, page 2).

Final Approval Date 10/29/2014
Result
  1. All objections were overruled.
  2. Objectors James A. Curry (through Attorney David D. Dishman), Jabrani and Jabrani (through Attorney Santiago A. Cueto), James H. Kirby IV (through Attorney Patrick Sweeney), Jeffrey M. Nadeau (through Attorney Brian M. Silverio), Jennifer Deachin (through Attorney N. Albert Bacharach, Jr), and Julie Vanskyock (through Attorney Stephen J. Fearon, Jr) appealed the Final Approval.
  3. Appeal of Jabrani and Jabrani was dismissed for their failure to file a timely appeal brief.
  4. All other appeals were dismissed by the parties.
Dismissal of Last Appeal 03/30/2015
Attachments Class Action Complaint.pdf
Preliminary Approval Order.pdf
Final Approval.pdf
Docket Report.pdf
Appeal Docket.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of James A. Curry

Objectors James A. Curry
Signers David D. Dishman
Peter A. Flanagan
James A. Curry
Attorneys David D. Dishman
Peter A. Flanagan
Summary
  1. Settlement is not fair, reasonable, or adequate.
  2. De minimus provisions of the settlement unfairly and unreasonably require class members to release all claims against the Defendants.
  3. Requiring class members to fill out claims forms is unfair and unreasonable.
  4. The Release is overbroad.
  5. The Notice is deficient since it does not advise class members of all material terms of the Settlement,
  6. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
Attachments Objection of James A. Curry.pdf
Appeal of Objector James A. Curry.pdf
Dismissal of Appeal of James A. Curry.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Amirali Jabrani, Janet Jabrani

Objectors Amirali Jabrani
Janet Jabrani
Signers Santiago A. Cueto
Attorneys Santiago A. Cueto
Christopher A. Bandas
Theodore H. Frank
Summary
  1. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
  2. Settlement is designed to benefit class counsel, named representatives, future customers of Wells Fargo, and the defendants, at the expense of the class.
  3. Clear sailing provisions of the settlement are inappropriate.
  4. Defendants improperly settled with the "most malleable class counsel" (Objection, Page 16).
  5. According to the Declaration of Frank Burt, much of this objection appeared to be copied verbatim from objections filed in other cases by Attorney Adam Schulman (of the Center for Class Action Fairness). (See Declaration and Exhibit).

NOTE: Christopher Bandas filed his appearance for the Appeal only. NOTE: In the Deposition of A. Jabrani, the objector stated that he did not write his objection but rather, it was drafted by Christopher Bandas, Santiago Cueto, and Ted Frank (See Dep. Transcript, pages 30-32).

Attachments Objection of Amirali and Janet Jabrani.pdf
Appeal of Jabrani Objectors.pdf
Dismissal of Appeal of Jarbrani Objectors.pdf
Declaration of Frank Burt Regarding Objections.pdf
Declaration of Frank Burt Regarding Objections - Exhibit Showing Copied Objection.pdf
Appearance by Bandas for Jabrani Objectors.pdf
Deposition of A Jabrani.pdf
Deposition of J Jabrani.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of James H. Kirby IV

Objectors James H. Kirby IV
Signers Patrick Sweeney
Attorneys Patrick Sweeney
Summary
  1. Settlement does not adequately compensate class members for their harm.
  2. The aggregate value of the settlement is unclear.
  3. The claims process is unduly burdensome.
  4. Attorneys' fees are excessive and abstrusely calculated.
Attachments Objection of James H. Kirby IV.pdf
Appeal of Objector James H. Kirby IV.pdf
Dismissal of Remaining Appeals.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Jeffrey M. Nadeau

Objectors Jeffrey M. Nadeau
Signers Brian M. Silverio
Attorneys Brian M. Silverio
Summary
  1. Cy pres awards should not be made until all class members are made whole.
  2. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
  3. Injunctive relief benefits future customers of the Defendant, not current class members.

Objector initially filed a hand-drafted objection, alleging personal wrongs by the Defendant. His second objection was filed by an attorney (Brian M. Silverio) with a history of objecting to other settlements.

Attachments Objection of Jeffrey M. Nadeau.pdf
Objection of Jeffrey M. Nadeau - Part 2.pdf
Appeal of Objector Jeffrey M. Nadeau.pdf
Dismissal of Appeal of Jeffrey M. Nadeau.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Jennifer Deachin n/k/a Jennifer Hinjosa

Objectors Jennifer Deachin n/k/a Jennifer Hinjosa
Signers N. Albert Bacharach, Jr.
Attorneys N. Albert Bacharach, Jr.
Summary
  1. Settlement does not provide aggregate estimated damages suffered by the class.
  2. This omission does not allow class members adequate information to make a decision on opting out or objecting.
  3. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
  4. Defendants have an incentive to keep the claims rate low so that funds revert.
Attachments Objection of Jennifer Deachin.pdf
Appeal of Objector Jennifer Deachin.pdf
Dismissal of Remaining Appeals.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Peggy Pearson, Ashley Swain, Julie Vanskyock, Melissa Yoho

Objectors Peggy Pearson
Ashley Swain
Julie Vanskyock
Melissa Yoho
Signers Stephen J. Fearon, Jr
Attorneys Stephen J. Fearon, Jr
Summary
  1. Settlement omits extensive information of value to class members.
  2. Claim form is burdensome and will prevent many class members from receiving compensation.
  3. Release should only apply to class members whose claims are paid.
  4. Settlement process was tainted by the parties post-settlement machinations.
  5. The representation is inadequate for these class members' class of borrowers.
  6. Settlement improperly releases Defendants who were not parties to the negotiation.
  7. Injunctive relief is illusory, since it has already been addressed under regulation.
  8. Settlement seeks final approval before the end of the claims period.
  9. Opt Out and Objection periods are too short.
  10. Claim form improperly limits the class.
  11. Claim form is unfair and unduly complex.
  12. Distributing unclaimed funds to class, rather than a cy pres recipient, would more properly benefit the class.
Attachments Objection of Vanskyock et al - Part 1.pdf
Objection of Vanskyock et al - Part 2.pdf
Appeal of Vanskyock Objectors.pdf
Dismissal of Remaining Appeals.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Joneen Nielsen

Objectors Joneen Nielsen
Signers Joneen Nielsen
Attorneys
Summary
  1. Objector was satisfied with her experience with Wells Fargo
Attachments Objection of Joneen Nielsen.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Mark Biddison, Thomas Butler, Kimberly Butler, Giovanni Canonico, Denise Leska

Objectors Mark Biddison
Thomas Butler
Kimberly Butler
Giovanni Canonico
Denise Leska
Signers Tod Aronovitz
Attorneys Tod Aronovitz
Edward W. Ciolko
Pater A. Muhic
Brian D. Penny
John D. Zaremba
Summary
  1. Claim form-based settlement is unfairly burdensome.
  2. Funds would revert to Defendant if the claims rate was low enough.
  3. Settlement favors Class Counsel and Defendant, at the expense of the class.
  4. Settlement does not take into consideration all the ways Defendant generated illicit profits.
  5. Attorneys' fees were abstrusely calculated.
  6. Injunctive relief provides de minimis value to the settlement.
  7. Notice forms are "confusing and intimidating." (Objection, page 17).
Attachments Objection of Mark Biddison et al.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Susan P. Frank

Objectors Susan P. Frank
Signers Susan P. Frank
Attorneys
Summary
  1. Proposed award for class members is too low.
  2. Objector seeks a minimum settlement of $272.12 for herself.
Attachments Objection of Susan Frank.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated