Hartless v. Clorox Company

Case # 06-cv-02705
Case Name Hartless v. Clorox Company
Jurisdiction US District Court for S.D. CA

Clorox retailed "Clorox Automatic Toilet Bowl Cleaner with Bleach". In their product packaging and marketing, they claimed that it would not harm plumbing. Plaintiffs allege that the product did cause material damage to toilet parts, shortening the life span of those parts. They also allege that the Defendant was aware that their product damaged these parts but continued to falsely represent its safety.

Final Approval Date 01/20/2011
  1. All objections were found to be without merit and were overruled.
  2. Objectors Omar Rivero (through Attorney Bandas), Sam P. Cannata (pro se), and Sonia Newman (through Attorney Palmer) appealed the Final Approval.
  3. Plaintiffs motioned for an appeal bond of $7500, which was opposed by the objector-appellants.
  4. The Court denied the $7500 bond and instead ordered the payment of $3000 into a trust to ensure payment of appellate costs.
  5. The appeals were found to be without merit and were dismissed.
  6. Summary affirmance was granted.
Dismissal of Last Appeal 06/18/2012
Attachments First Amended Class Action Complaint.pdf
Preliminary Approval Order.pdf
Final Approval.pdf
Motion for Attorneys' Fees.pdf
Motion for Appeal Bond.pdf
Reply in Support of Motion for Appeal Bond.pdf
Order Denying Motion for Appeal Bond.pdf
Affirmance of District Court Decision.pdf
Docket Report.pdf
Consolidated Appeal Docket.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Omar Rivero

Objectors Omar Rivero
Signers Omar Rivero
Attorneys Omar Rivero
Christopher A. Bandas
  1. Cy pres awards are improper unless all class members are completely made whole.
  2. Notice is deficient in that it requires a proof of purchase or damage, while the class is defined more broadly.
  3. Attorneys' fees are improperly calculated. NOTE: Omar Rivero appeared pro se in his objection but Christopher Bandas signed his appeal. Bandas did not file an appearance in this case.
Attachments Objection of Omar Rivero.pdf
Appeal of Objector Omar Rivero.pdf
Bandas Appearance for Objector-Appellant Rivero.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Sam P. Cannata

Objectors Sam P. Cannata
Signers Sam P. Cannata
Attorneys Sam P. Cannata
  1. Attorneys' fees are excessive.
  2. Payment of attorneys' fees should be delayed.
  3. Cy pres recipient is not named and could potentially take away funds that would otherwise go to class members.
  4. Clear sailing provisions of the settlement are improper.
Attachments Objection of Sam P. Cannata.pdf
Appeal of Objector Sam P. Cannata.pdf
Cannata Response to Motion for Appeal Bond.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated

Objection of Sonia Newman

Objectors Sonia Newman
Signers Joseph Darrell Palmer
Attorneys Joseph Darrell Palmer
Janine Menhennet
  1. Cy pres recipients must be identified in the settlement.
  2. Class cannot be certified because consumer protection laws in various states are in conflict.
  3. Insufficient information is available regarding the reasonableness of attorneys' fees.
  4. Attorneys' fees are improperly calculated.
  5. Class counsel seeks reimbursement for unrecoverable expenses (copies, online research, etc)

NOTE: Janine Menhennet appeared on behalf of this objector at the Fairness Hearing.

Attachments Objection of Sonia Newman.pdf
Transcript of Fairness Hearing.pdf
Appeal of Objector Sonia Newman.pdf
Newman Response to Motion for Appeal Bond.pdf
Added to Index
Last Updated