DOCSLIB.ORG

Plaintiffs' Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement And

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Plaintiffs' Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement And Case: 1:11-cv-00226-TSB Doc #: 170 Filed: 03/02/18 Page: 1 of 52 PAGEID #: 7128 1 BLOOD HURST & O’REARDON, LLP TIMOTHY G. BLOOD (CA 149343) 2 LESLIE E. HURST (CA 178432) THOMAS J. O’REARDON II (CA 247952) 3 501 West Broadway, Suite 1490 San Diego, CA 92101 4 Telephone: 619/338-1100 619/338-1101 (fax) 5 [email protected] [email protected] 6 [email protected] 7 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Class 8 [Additional counsel appear on signature page.] 9 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO LLP , 12 DINO RIKOS, TRACEY BURNS, and Case No. 11-CV-00226-TSB LEO JARZEMBROWSKI, On Behalf of 13 Themselves, All Others Similarly Situated EARDON CLASS ACTION and the General Public, O’R 14 PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR FINAL & Plaintiffs, APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION 15 SETTLEMENT AND REQUEST FOR URST v. AWARD OF ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND H 16 EXPENSES THE PROCTER & GAMBLE 17 COMPANY, LOOD LOOD B Date: April 16, 2018 18 Defendant. Time: 10:00 a.m. Judge: Hon. Timothy S. Black 19 Courtroom: 815 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 No. 1:11-cv-226-TSB 00131658 PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT Case: 1:11-cv-00226-TSB Doc #: 170 Filed: 03/02/18 Page: 2 of 52 PAGEID #: 7129 1 Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, Plaintiffs Dino Rikos, Tracey Burns, and Leo 2 Jarzembowski, move for entry of a judgment and final approval order consistent with the terms 3 of the Parties’ Stipulation of Settlement, including its exhibits: 4 (1) Confirming the appointment of Dino Rikos, Tracey Burns, and Leo 5 Jarzembowski as the Class Representatives for the Settlement Class; 6 (2) Confirming certification of the Settlement Class; 7 (3) Confirming the appointment as Class Counsel of Timothy G. Blood and 8 Thomas J. O’Reardon II of Blood Hurst and O’Reardon, LLP; 9 (4) Granting final approval of the Settlement, including the Settlement Agreement 10 and its exhibits (the “Settlement”), and finding the Settlement to be fair, reasonable, and 11 adequate; LLP , 12 (5) Finding that the form, content, and methods of disseminating Class Notice of 13 the Settlement constituted the best notice practicable under the circumstances and satisfied the EARDON O’R 14 requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c) and the United States Constitution (including the due & 15 process clause); URST H 16 (6) Awarding Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses, and Class Representative service 17 awards; and LOOD LOOD B 18 (7) Dismissing the Action with prejudice as provided for by the Settlement. 19 This Motion is based on the proposed Settlement, the accompanying Memorandum of 20 Points and Authorities submitted by Plaintiffs, the supporting declarations and exhibits, all 21 pleadings and documents on file (including, but not limited to, Plaintiffs’ Motion for 22 Preliminary Approval (Doc. No. 166) and the Court’s Preliminary Approval Order (Doc. 23 No. 167)), and upon such evidence and arguments as may properly come before the Court at 24 the time of the hearing. 25 /// 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// i No. 1:11-cv-226-TSB 00131658 PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT Case: 1:11-cv-00226-TSB Doc #: 170 Filed: 03/02/18 Page: 3 of 52 PAGEID #: 7130 1 A proposed Final Judgment and Order Approving Settlement is attached as Exhibit 2 to 2 the Declaration of Timothy G. Blood in Support of Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class 3 Action Settlement. See Doc. No. 166-2 at PageID 6927. 4 Dated: March 2, 2018 BLOOD HURST & O’REARDON, LLP TIMOTHY G. BLOOD (CA 149343) 5 LESLIE E. HURST (CA 178432) THOMAS J. O’REARDON II (CA 247952) 6 By: s/ Timothy G. Blood 7 TIMOTHY G. BLOOD 8 501 West Broadway, Suite 1490 San Diego, CA 92101 9 Tel: 619/338-1100 619/338-1101 (fax) 10 [email protected] [email protected] 11 [email protected] LLP , Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Class 12 FUTSCHER LAW PLLC 13 EARDON DAVID A. FUTSCHER 913 N. Oak Drive O’R 14 Villa Hills, KY 41017 & Tel: 859/912-2394 15 [email protected] URST H 16 NICHOLAS & TOMASEVIC, LLP CRAIG M. NICHOLAS (178444) 17 ALEX M. TOMASEVIC (245598) LOOD LOOD B 225 Broadway, 19th Floor 18 San Diego, CA 92101 Tel: 619/325-0492 19 619/325-0496 (fax) [email protected] 20 [email protected] MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A. 21 RACHEL L. SOFFIN One Tampa City Center 22 201 N. Franklin St., 7th Floor Tampa, FL 33602 23 Tel: 813/223-5505 813/223-5402 (fax) 24 [email protected] 25 O’BRIEN LAW FIRM, PC EDWARD K. O’BRIEN 26 One Sundial Avenue, 5th Floor Manchester, NH 03103 27 Tel: 603/668-0600 603/672-3815 (fax) 28 [email protected] ii No. 1:11-cv-226-TSB 00131658 PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT Case: 1:11-cv-00226-TSB Doc #: 170 Filed: 03/02/18 Page: 4 of 52 PAGEID #: 7131 1 SAMUEL ISSACHAROFF 40 Washington Square South 2 New York, NY 10012 Tel: 212/998-6580 3 [email protected] BONNETT, FAIRBOURN, FRIEDMAN 4 & BALINT, P.C. ANDREW S. FRIEDMAN 5 ELAINE A. RYAN PATRICIA N. SYVERSON (203111) 6 2325 E. Camelback Road, Suite 300 Phoenix, AZ 85016 7 Tel: 602/274-1100 602/798-5860 (fax) 8 [email protected] [email protected] 9 [email protected] 10 Additional Attorneys for Plaintiffs 11 LLP , 12 13 EARDON O’R 14 & 15 URST H 16 17 LOOD LOOD B 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 iii No. 1:11-cv-226-TSB 00131658 PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT Case: 1:11-cv-00226-TSB Doc #: 170 Filed: 03/02/18 Page: 5 of 52 PAGEID #: 7132 1 S.D. OHIO CIV. R. 7.2(a)(3) MEMORANDUM SUMMARY 2 Pursuant to S.D. Ohio Civ. R. 7.2(a)(3) and this Court’s Civil Procedures, plaintiffs 3 Dino Rikos, Tracey Burns, and Leo Jarzembowski (“Plaintiffs”) respectfully submit this 4 summary regarding their over length memorandum in support of their motion for final 5 approval of class action settlement and request for an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses. 6 Plaintiffs and P&G seek final approval of a nationwide class action settlement. This 7 memorandum is filed on behalf of Plaintiffs. The proposed Settlement has been reached after 8 seven years of litigation that included extensive motion practice before this Court, the Sixth 9 Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court, fact and expert discovery involving over 770,000 pages 10 of documents, subpoenas to more than 30 third-parties, 19 depositions, 14 testifying experts, 11 21 expert declarations and reports, and protracted settlement negotiations with three different LLP , 12 mediators before and after rulings on class certification. The proposed settlement is fair, 13 reasonable and adequate and readily meets the standards for final approval. Furthermore, EARDON O’R 14 Plaintiffs’ Counsel’s request for an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses, and for Class & 15 Representative service awards are fair, reasonable and well within the ranges set by governing URST H 16 case law. 17 Section I (pages 1-2) is a brief introduction that summarizes the primary reasons why LOOD LOOD B 18 the proposed settlement should receive final approval and the proposed fee award should be 19 granted, including outlining the Settlement’s benefits, and the successful Class Notice 20 Program. 21 Section II (page 2) sets forth the general history of the litigation, including the 22 substantial motion practice, appeal, and party, third-party and expert discovery. Further detail 23 is provided in the Declaration of Timothy G. Blood in Support of Motion for Preliminary 24 Approval of Class Action Settlement. See Doc. No. 166-1 25 Section III (pages 3-8) discusses the terms of the Settlement. Under the Settlement, 26 P&G will provide up to $15 million in cash refunds, plus at least $5 million and up to $10 27 million in Digestive Health Improvement Contributions that will directly benefit the 28 Settlement Class. To obtain the cash payments, Settlement Class Members need only return a iv No. 1:11-cv-226-TSB 00131658 PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT Case: 1:11-cv-00226-TSB Doc #: 170 Filed: 03/02/18 Page: 6 of 52 PAGEID #: 7133 1 simple Claim Form, and no proof of purchase is required. P&G will separately pay all notice 2 and settlement administration expenses, awards of Plaintiffs’ Counsel’s attorneys’ fees and 3 costs, and Class Representative service awards. P&G agrees to not make the “clinically 4 proven” five symptom relief advertising claims absent new supporting clinical data or analysis, 5 or a change in the product formula. 6 Section IV (pages 8-15) discusses application of the requirements of final settlement 7 approval, and factors considered by courts in this Circuit. At final approval, the court’s role is 8 to determine whether the settlement is not collusive and, “taken as a whole, is fair, reasonable 9 and adequate to all concerned.” Clark Equipment Co. v. International Union, Allied Industrial 10 Workers, 803 F.2d 878, 880 (6th Cir. 1986); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e)(2). The Settlement 11 is fair, reasonable, and adequate, and should be finally approved. LLP , 12 Section V (pages 15-18) sets forth and applies Rule 23’s certification requirements to 13 the Settlement Class. With one exception, the proposed Settlement Class is identical to the one EARDON O’R 14 certified by this Court and affirmed by the Sixth Circuit: the Settlement Class is nationwide.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Third Circuit
    Full_Name City State Last_Name Next Clerkship Opening Accepting Applications Mail, Email or OSCAR? Post Grad Experience? Notes Thomas L. Ambro Wilmington DE Ambro 2021 posted on OSCAR online preferred Stephanos Bibas Philadelphia PA Bibas 2020 and 2021 posted on OSCAR online, email, do not send paper preferred Michael A. Chagares Newark NJ Chagares 2022 posted on OSCAR online, paper requires district court clerkship Robert E. Cowen Trenton NJ Cowen No longer hiring term clerks n/a n/a D. Michael Fisher Pittsburgh PA Fisher 2020 posted on OSCAR online May be reducing workload/going to 2021 but not accepting applications 3 clerks. Does not want paper Julio M. Fuentes Newark NJ Fuentes now no online prefers prior clerkship or work experience applications, will post on OSCAR Joseph A. Greenaway, Jr. Newark NJ Greenaway 2020 yes paper requires one year post-grad work experience not hiring at this time, no other Morton I. Greenberg Trenton NJ Greenberg information no paper prefers prior clerkship Thomas M. Hardiman Pittsburgh PA Hardiman 2020 posted on OSCAR online Kent A. Jordan Wilmington DE Jordan 2021 yes paper Cheryl Ann Krause Philadelphia PA Krause 2021 posted on OSCAR online prefers prior clerkship Paul Matey Newark NJ Matey 2021 posted on OSCAR mail, email preferred Prefers candidates with a public interest background and work Theodore A. McKee Philadelphia PA McKee not accepting applications no paper experience Richard Lowell Nygaard Erie PA Nygaard No longer hiring term clerks n/a n/a David J. Porter Pittsburgh PA Porter 2020, 2021, 2022 posted on OSCAR online, paper, email May be reducing workload/going to Marjorie O.
    [Show full text]
  • March 12, 2013
    REPORT OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES March 12, 2013 The Judicial Conference of the United States convened in Washington, D.C., on March 12, 2013, pursuant to the call of the Chief Justice of the United States issued under 28 U.S.C. § 331. The Chief Justice presided, and the following members of the Conference were present: First Circuit: Chief Judge Sandra L. Lynch Judge Paul J. Barbadoro, District of New Hampshire Second Circuit: Chief Judge Dennis Jacobs Chief Judge Carol Bagley Amon, Eastern District of New York Third Circuit: Chief Judge Theodore A. McKee Judge Joel A. Pisano,1 District of New Jersey Fourth Circuit: Chief Judge William B. Traxler, Jr. Chief Judge Deborah K. Chasanow, District of Maryland 1Designated by the Chief Justice as a substitute for Chief Judge Gary L. Lancaster, Western District of Pennsylvania, who was unable to attend. Judicial Conference of the United States March 12, 2013 Fifth Circuit: Chief Judge Carl E. Stewart Chief Judge Sarah S. Vance, Eastern District of Louisiana Sixth Circuit: Chief Judge Alice M. Batchelder Chief Judge Thomas A. Varlan, Eastern District of Tennessee Seventh Circuit: Chief Judge Frank H. Easterbrook Judge Ruben Castillo, Northern District of Illinois Eighth Circuit: Chief Judge William Jay Riley Judge Rodney W. Sippel, Eastern District of Missouri Ninth Circuit: Chief Judge Alex Kozinski Judge Robert S. Lasnik, Western District of Washington Tenth Circuit: Chief Judge Mary Beck Briscoe Judge Dee V. Benson, District of Utah Eleventh Circuit: Chief Judge Joel F. Dubina Judge W. Louis Sands, Middle District of Georgia 2 Judicial Conference of the United States March 12, 2013 District of Columbia Circuit: Chief Judge Merrick B.
    [Show full text]
  • The Political Ideologies of Law Clerks and Their Judges
    University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Coase-Sandor Institute for Law and Economics Economics 2016 The olitP ical Ideologies of Law Clerks and their Judges Adam Bonica Adam S. Chilton Jacob Goldin Kyle Rozema Maya Sen Follow this and additional works at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/law_and_economics Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Adam Bonica, Adam S. Chilton, Jacob Goldin, Kyle Rozema & Maya Sen, " The oP litical Ideologies of Law Clerks and their Judges" (Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Economics No. 754, 2016). This Working Paper is brought to you for free and open access by the Coase-Sandor Institute for Law and Economics at Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Economics by an authorized administrator of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Political Ideologies of Law Clerks and their Judges Adam Bonica, Adam Chilton, Jacob Goldin, Kyle Rozema, & Maya Sen∗ February 29, 2016 We study the political ideology of judicial law clerks using a novel dataset that combines the most comprehensive data sources on political ideology and the identity of U.S. federal law clerks. First, we examine the distribu- tion of clerks' ideology and find that clerks tend to be disproportionately liberal, with clerks on lower courts being more liberal on average than clerks for higher courts. Second, we find that judges tend to consistently hire clerks with similar ideologies and that those ideologies track available measures of the judge's own ideology.
    [Show full text]
  • Council and Participants
    The American Law Institute OFFICERS DAVID F. LEVI, President ROBERTA COOPER RAMO, Chair of the Council DOUGLAS LAYCOCK, 1st Vice President LEE H. ROSENTHAL, 2nd Vice President WALLACE B. JEFFERSON, Theasurer PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, Secretary RICHARD L. REVESZ, Director STEPHANIE A. MIDDLETON, Deputy Director COUNCIL Kim J. ASKEw, K&L Gates, Dallas, TX JOSE I. ASTIGARRAGA, Reed Smith, Miami, FL DONALD B. AYER, Jones Day, Washington, DC SCOTT BALES, Arizona Supreme Court, Phoenix, AZ JOHN H. BEISNER, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, Washington, DC JOHN B. BELLINGER III, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP, Washington, DC AMELIA H. Boss, Drexel University Thomas R. Kline School of Law, Philadelphia, PA ELIZABETH J. CABRASER, Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, San Francisco, CA EVAN R. CHESLER, Cravath, Swaine & Moore, New York, NY MARIANO-FLORENTINO CUELLAR, California Supreme Court, San Francisco, CA IVAN K. FONG, 3M Company, St. Paul, MN KENNETH C. FRAZIER, Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ PAUL L. FRIEDMAN, U.S. District Court, District of Columbia, Washington, DC STEVEN S. GENSLER, University of Oklahoma College of Law, Norman, OK ABBE R. GLUCK,Yale Law School, New Haven, CT YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, Oakland, CA ANTON G. HAJJAR, Chevy Chase, MD TERESA WILTON HARMON, Sidley Austin, Chicago, IL NATHAN L. HECHT, Texas Supreme Court, Austin, TX WILLIAM C. HUBBARD, Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, Columbia, SC SAMUEL ISSACHAROFF, New York University School of Law, New York, NY III COUNCIL KETANJI BROWN JACKSON, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Washington, DC WALLACE B. JEFFERSON, Alexander Dubose Jefferson & Townsend, Austin, TX GREGORY P.
    [Show full text]
  • Panel Assignment in the Federal Courts of Appeals Marin K
    Cornell Law Review Volume 103 Article 2 Issue 1 November 2017 Panel Assignment in the Federal Courts of Appeals Marin K. Levy Duke University School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr Part of the Courts Commons Recommended Citation Marin K. Levy, Panel Assignment in the Federal Courts of Appeals, 103 Cornell L. Rev. 65 (2017) Available at: https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol103/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Cornell Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Cornell Law: A Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. \\jciprod01\productn\C\CRN\103-1\CRN102.txt unknown Seq: 1 17-NOV-17 13:58 PANEL ASSIGNMENT IN THE FEDERAL COURTS OF APPEALS Marin K. Levy† It is common knowledge that the federal courts of appeals typically hear cases in panels of three judges and that the composition of the panel can have significant consequences for case outcomes and for legal doctrine more generally. Yet neither legal scholars nor social scientists have focused on the question of how judges are selected for their panels. Instead, a substantial body of scholarship simply assumes that panel assignment is random. This Article provides what, up until this point, has been a missing account of panel assignment. Drawing on a multiyear qualitative study of five circuit courts, including in-depth inter- views with thirty-five judges and senior administrators, I show that strictly random selection is a myth, and an improb- able one at that—in many instances, it would have been im- possible as a practical matter for the courts studied here to create their panels by random draw.
    [Show full text]
  • Advise & Consent
    The Los Angeles County Bar Association Appellate Courts Section Presents Advise & Consent: A Primer to the Federal Judicial Appointment Process Wednesday, October 28, 2020 Program - 12:00 - 1:30 PM Zoom Webinar CLE Credit: 1.5 Hours Credit (including Appellate Courts Specialization) Provider #36 The Los Angeles County Bar Association is a State Bar of California approved MCLE provider. The Los Angles County Bar Association certifies that this activity has been approved for MCLE credit by the State Bar of California. PANELIST BIOS Judge Kenneth Lee (Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals) Kenneth Kiyul Lee is a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The U.S. Senate confirmed him on May 15, 2019, making him the nation’s first Article III judge born in the Republic of Korea. Prior to his appointment, Judge Lee was a partner at the law firm of Jenner & Block in Los Angeles, where he handled a wide variety of complex litigation matters and had a robust pro bono practice. Judge Lee previously served as an Associate Counsel to President George W. Bush and as Special Counsel to Senator Arlen Specter, then-chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He started his legal career as an associate at Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen & Katz in New York. Judge Lee is a 2000 magna cum laude graduate of Harvard Law School and a 1997 summa cum laude graduate of Cornell University. He clerked for Judge Emilio M. Garza of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit from 2000 to 2001. Judge Leslie Southwick (Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals) Leslie Southwick was appointed to the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Volume 69.3 Full Issue
    EDITOR’S NOTE Welcome to the third issue of Volume 69 of the Federal Communications Law Journal (“FCLJ”), the official journal of the Federal Communications Bar Association (“FCBA”). Over the summer, the FCLJ welcomed 50 new talented individuals to our membership. Our team has worked tirelessly to create a satiating Annual Review issue that encompasses a range of topics, including data security regulation, media ownership rules, Open Data Initiatives (“ODIs”), and international cybersecurity regimes. In the first Note, Alex Bossone addresses the lack of federal consumer data security regulation in an age where consumers suffer from identity thefts and cyber-attacks. Mr. Bossone suggests an augmentation of the FTC’s existing data security powers and an emulation of the FCC Enforcement Bureau’s approach to mandate an effective legal framework. In the second Note, Bryan Schatz explores the shortcomings of the current media ownership rules. Mr. Schatz proposes solutions that can free up the Quadrennial Review and help the FCC promulgate and enforce new media ownership rules. In the third Note, Monica Savukinas examines how the Obama administration encouraged federal agencies to use ODIs for innovation. Ms. Savukinas suggests that the FCC use ODIs through prize contests, hackathons, and open dialogue with developers, as part of its innovation policy. This issue also features an interesting article on international cybersecurity, penned by Zahra Dsouza, who is currently a Law Clerk at Kohn Swift & Graf P.C. and an LL.M. graduate of Temple University Law School. Noting the growing problem of malicious cybersecurity incidents, Ms. Dsouza assesses the futility of Cybersecurity Incident Response Teams (“CSIRTs”) as a response to such incidents, as they have been without a clear mandate.
    [Show full text]
  • Measuring Judicial Ideology Using Law Clerk Hiring
    Measuring Judicial Ideology Using Law Clerk Hiring Adam Bonica, Adam Chilton, Jacob Goldin, Kyle Rozema, & Maya Sen∗ July 21, 2016 ∗Bonica: Stanford University, Department of Political Science, e-mail: [email protected]. Chilton: University of Chicago Law School, e-mail: [email protected]. Goldin: Stanford Law School, e-mail: js- [email protected]. Rozema: Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law, e-mail: [email protected]. Sen: Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government, e-mail: maya [email protected]. For helpful com- ments, we are grateful to Omri Ben-Shahar, Erin Delaney, Joshua Fischman, Tom Ginsburg, William Hubbard, Tonja Jacobi, Jim Lindgren, Robin Kar, Anup Malani, Jonathan Masur, Richard McAdams, Jennifer Nou, Eric Posner, Max Schanzenbach, Matt Spitzer, Eugene Volokh, and seminar participants at the University of Chicago Law School and at the Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law. We are grate- ful to Dan Katz for providing data on the identities of district court and circuit court clerks. Abstract We present a new measure of judicial ideology based on judicial hiring behavior. Specifically, we utilize the ideology of the law clerks hired by federal judges to estimate the ideology of the judges themselves. These Clerk-Based Ideology (CBI) scores complement existing measures of ju- dicial ideology in several ways. First, CBI scores can be estimated for judges across the federal judicial hierarchy. Second, CBI scores can cap- ture temporal changes in ideology. Third, CBI scores avoid case selection and strategic behavior concerns that plague existing vote-based measures. We illustrate the promise of CBI scores through a number of applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Third Circuit Judicial Conference Lancaster Marriott at Penn Square Lancaster, PA April 19-21, 2017
    Third Circuit Judicial Conference Lancaster Marriott at Penn Square Lancaster, PA April 19-21, 2017 AGENDA Wednesday, April 19th 12:00 pm - 7:00 pm Registration and Conference Services Second Floor Lobby 12:00 pm - 1:15 pm Judicial Council Automation and Technology Hickory Room Committee Luncheon Meeting 12:00 pm - 1:15 pm Judicial Council Facilities and Security Committee Independence Room Luncheon Meeting 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm Clerks of Court Montgomery House Luncheon Meeting 1:30 pm - 2:00 pm Welcome - Judges Only Meeting Commonwealth 3 and 4 Honorable D. Brooks Smith Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals Third Circuit Recognition of Judges who have taken Senior Status Presenter: Honorable D. Brooks Smith Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals Third Circuit Introduction of New Judges Presenter: Honorable D. Brooks Smith Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals Third Circuit 2:00 pm - 2:30 pm Federal Judges Association Meeting Commonwealth 3 and 4 Honorable Cynthia M. Rufe United States District Judge, Eastern District of Pennsylvania Vice President, Chair of Communications, and Executive Committee Member −1− Federal Judges Association Honorable Jerome B. Simandle Chief Judge, District of New Jersey Executive Committee Member Federal Judges Association 2:00 pm - 2:30 pm Federal Magistrate Judges Association Meeting Hickory Room Honorable Henry S. Perkin United States Magistrate Judge, Eastern District of Pennsylvania Third Circuit Representative Federal Magistrate Judges Association 2:00 pm - 2:30 pm National Conference of Bankruptcy Judges Meeting State Room – 3rd Floor Montgomery House Honorable Robert N. Opel II Chief United States Bankruptcy Court Judge, Middle District of Pennsylvania Third Circuit Representative Period I 2:30 pm - 4:00 pm Implicit Bias in Jury Selection and in Other Aspects Commonwealth 1 and 2 of the Criminal Justice System 1.5 hours CLE Moderator: Honorable Katharine S.
    [Show full text]
  • Here Are Many Accounts of Such Unity and Mutual Encouragement
    HARVARD JOURNAL of LAW & PUBLIC POLICY VOLUME 43, NUMBER 3 SUMMER 2020 ESSAYS THE ROLE OF THE EXECUTIVE William P. Barr ........................................................................ 605 CIVIC CHARITY AND THE CONSTITUTION Thomas B. Griffith ................................................................... 633 ARTICLES SIXTH AMENDMENT FEDERALISM Louis J. Capozzi III ................................................................. 645 TAKING ANOTHER LOOK AT THE CALL ON THE FIELD: ROE, CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS, AND STARE DECISIS Thomas J. Molony .................................................................... 733 NOTE DEATH QUALIFICATION AND THE RIGHT TO TRIAL BY JURY: AN ORIGINALIST ASSESSMENT Douglas Colby ......................................................................... 815 HARVARD JOURNAL of LAW & PUBLIC POLICY Editor-in-Chief NICOLE M. BAADE Deputy Editor-in-Chief Articles Chair R.J. MCVEIGH Managing Editors JACOB THACKSTON HUGH DANILACK AARON GYDE Executive Editors Senior Articles Editors ALEX CAVE AARON HSU DOUGLAS COLBY Deputy Managing Editors KEVIN KOLJACK ANASTASIA FRANE MAX BLOOM RYAN MAK JOSHUA HA CHASE BROWNDORF JAMES MCGLONE ADAM KING JOHN KETCHAM JOEY MONTGOMERY BRIAN KULP STUART SLAYTON WHITNEY LEETS Articles Editors ANNA LUKINA Chief Financial Officer NICK CORDOVA JOHN MITZEL DYLAN SOARES JAMIN DOWDY JASJAAP SIDHU AARON HENRICKS BRYAN SOHN Deputy Chief Financial Officer JASON MUEHLHOFF DOUG STEPHENS IV COOPER GODFREY ALEX RIDDLE MATTHEW WEINSTEIN OLIVER ROBERTS Communications Manager JAY SCHAEFER Notes
    [Show full text]
  • September 16, 2014
    REPORT OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE UNITED STATES September 16, 2014 The Judicial Conference of the United States convened in Washington, D.C., on September 16, 2014, pursuant to the call of the Chief Justice of the United States issued under 28 U.S.C. § 331. The Chief Justice presided, and the following members of the Conference were present: First Circuit: Chief Judge Sandra L. Lynch Judge Paul J. Barbadoro, District of New Hampshire Second Circuit: Chief Judge Robert A. Katzmann Chief Judge William M. Skretny, Western District of New York Third Circuit: Chief Judge Theodore A. McKee Chief Judge Joy Flowers Conti, Western District of Pennsylvania Fourth Circuit: Chief Judge William B. Traxler, Jr. Chief Judge Deborah K. Chasanow, District of Maryland Fifth Circuit: Chief Judge Carl E. Stewart Chief Judge Louis Guirola, Jr., Southern District of Mississippi Judicial Conference of the United States September 16, 2014 Sixth Circuit: Chief Judge Ransey Guy Cole, Jr. Chief Judge Paul Lewis Maloney, Western District of Michigan Seventh Circuit: Chief Judge Diane P. Wood Chief Judge Rubén Castillo, Northern District of Illinois Eighth Circuit: Chief Judge William Jay Riley Judge Rodney W. Sippel, Eastern District of Missouri Ninth Circuit: Chief Judge Alex Kozinski Judge Robert S. Lasnik, Western District of Washington Tenth Circuit: Chief Judge Mary Beck Briscoe Judge Dee V. Benson, District of Utah Eleventh Circuit: Chief Judge Ed Carnes Judge W. Louis Sands, Middle District of Georgia District of Columbia Circuit: Chief Judge Merrick B. Garland Chief Judge Richard W. Roberts, District of Columbia 2 Judicial Conference of the United States September 16, 2014 Federal Circuit: Chief Judge Sharon Prost Court of International Trade: Chief Judge Timothy C.
    [Show full text]
  • A Nonagenarian Discusses Life As a Senior Circuit Judge
    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by University of Arkansas at Little Rock: UALR Bowen Law Repository The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process Volume 14 Issue 2 Article 2 2013 A Nonagenarian Discusses Life as a Senior Circuit Judge Ruggero J. Aldisert Follow this and additional works at: https://lawrepository.ualr.edu/appellatepracticeprocess Part of the Judges Commons Recommended Citation Ruggero J. Aldisert, A Nonagenarian Discusses Life as a Senior Circuit Judge, 14 J. APP. PRAC. & PROCESS 183 (2013). Available at: https://lawrepository.ualr.edu/appellatepracticeprocess/vol14/iss2/2 This document is brought to you for free and open access by Bowen Law Repository: Scholarship & Archives. It has been accepted for inclusion in The Journal of Appellate Practice and Process by an authorized administrator of Bowen Law Repository: Scholarship & Archives. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE JOURNAL OF APPELLATE PRACTICE AND PROCESS ESSAY A NONAGENARIAN DISCUSSES LIFE AS A SENIOR CIRCUIT JUDGE Ruggero J. Aldisert* A senior circuit judge is often asked: What do you people do? What kind of cases do they assign to you? And how many? Do you decide what cases you want to work on? Where do you work? What kind of staff helps you? Do you have any spare time to do legal writing for the public? How often do you do it? Any books? Any articles? .... These are legitimate questions, and I have decided to take a crack at answerinF them. I do so both because the literature is somewhat sparse and also because senior judges are, by definition, senior citizens, and often the assumption is that they are doddering and "over the hill." At law schools-heavens to Betsy-both faculty and student law review editors don't truck with what they consider the Geritol set, and the general *Senior United States Circuit Judge, Chief Judge Emeritus, United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
    [Show full text]