Ninth Circuit rejects Mini-Wheats settlement over attorney fees, cy pres award

, The National Law Journal


A federal appeals court has rejected a class action settlement over alleged false advertising of a breakfast cereal, ruling that a plan to contribute some of the payout to charity bore no relation to the case and that the plaintiffs attorneys' fee award was excessively generous.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at

What's being said

  • Mike

    Class action law is in need, yet again, of reform. The "class" gets coupons or other trinkets while the lawyers get, well, rich. This time the ninth has got it right.

  • Ken Perkins

    Good! The class action has turned into a racket - where the named Plaintiff gets a nominal award, the class gets a benefit of dubious value and class counsel make out like bandits. Time to rein in.

  • Lulaine

    It's always tough trying to balance what is fair for the attorneys and what is fair for the plaintiffs. Hopefully this problem gets resolved too because both parties have legitimate claims. One has suffered hardship and the other has worked hard to rectify that but sometimes those interests clash but there has to be an understanding to be had where both can be happy with the consequences.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Preparing comment abuse report for Article #1202563222879

Thank you!

This article's comments will be reviewed.