Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Dr. Blofeld (talk | contribs) at 13:36, 25 August 2011 (→Issues and conflicts: reword per GAR). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Theodore H. Frank (born December 14, 1968) is an American lawyer, legal writer and blogger, based in Washington, D.C.. He is the founder and president of the Center for Class Action Fairness (CCAF), established in 2009. Particularly active in protecting consumers from their own class action lawyers, in product liability, and in civil procedure, the Wall Street Journal has referred to him as "a leading tort-reform advocate."

Frank graduated from the Brandeis University in 1991 and the University of Chicago Law School in 1994 with a Juris Doctor. A litigator from 1995 to 2005 and former clerk for Frank H. Easterbrook on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, Frank is also a former director and fellow of the Legal Center for the Public Interest at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington D.C.. As of 2011 he is an adjunct fellow at Manhattan Institute’s Center for Legal Policy, where he is also editor of the Institute's web magazine, PointofLaw.com. He is also on the Executive Committee of the Federalist Society's Litigation Practice Group and contributes regularly to conservative legal weblogs, and as of 2008, he is a member of the American Law Institute.

Frank has been outspoken on and has written on issues such as product liability, tobacco litigation, asbestos litigation, medical malpractice, pharmaceuticals, and Hurricane Katrina, among other topics. He has written for several publications, including the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post, as well as law reviews, and has appeared on news networks, including National Public Radio, the BBC, and Fox News. According to the book Game Change: Obama and the Clintons, McCain and Palin, and the Race of a Lifetime, Frank wrote the vetting report for vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin for the John McCain campaign in the 2008 presidential election.

Background and early career

Frank was born in 1968. He is the nephew of Johanna Hurwitz and a cousin of Washington Post reporter Garance Franke-Ruta.

He graduated from the Benjamin Franklin High School in New Orleans, then earned his Bachelor of Arts degree in Economics from Brandeis University in May 1991. He wrote columns for his campus newspaper and political magazines and was a member of the student senate. He objected to a campaign to stop serving pork at the Jewish university, which was noted in The New York Times. He said, "The general feeling is that we're not forcing them to eat pork and they shouldn't be forcing us not to eat pork."

In 1994 Frank earned his Juris Doctor with high honors from the University of Chicago Law School. At Chicago he earned Order of the Coif and served on the law review. While at Chicago Law, he was a known presence on Usenet groups and researched urban legends; he was an early contributor to the Baseball Prospectus collective through essays on the Usenet group rec.sport.baseball.

After clerking for Judge Frank H. Easterbrook of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, Frank entered private practice between 1995 and 2005 as a litigator on class action tort cases at law firms Kirkland & Ellis, Irell & Manella, and O’Melveny & Myers. Among his earliest cases were two sudden acceleration cases, where he represented the automakers. As part of his practice, Frank defended a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) to delay the 2003 California gubernatorial recall election, defended Vioxx liability cases, and served on defense teams for antitrust and patent cases.

Advocacy of tort reform

"The whole point of a class action is to generate efficiencies that wouldn't be possible in individual actions -- so why are the attorneys taking a one-third contingent fee instead of a much smaller percentage?"

Frank joined the American Enterprise Institute as a fellow in 2005, and as the director of the Legal Center for the Public Interest he spoke and wrote about civil justice issues and securities law and legal liability. The AEI offered him a fellowship to research the effects of the Class Action Fairness Act. Frank also sits on the Executive Committee of the Federalist Society's Litigation Practice Group.

Frank is a leading proponent for tort reform in the United States. According to Frank, he became disillusioned at class action tactics, and the willingness of judges to approve settlements he felt were poor for consumers. He has strongly criticized obesity lawsuits, calling them "rent-seeking vehicles that are neither good law nor good public policy."

"Class-action lawsuits are becoming so prevalent that some legal experts worry the headlong rush to certify so many cases — and the settlements that result — may compromise fundamental principles of justice and place an unsustainable burden on an already creaky court system. The most barbed criticisms are aimed at settlements that increasingly line legal pockets with millions of dollars in fees while plaintiffs make do with paltry sums or, more controversially, coupons for compensatory goods or services. In some cases, the awards would be so inconsequential to individuals that the money goes into a public trust that may never directly benefit the aggrieved plaintiffs."

In April 2008, several members of Congress brought up the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act under Title VII, a revision of law "to state that prior acts outside the 180 day statute of limitations could be included", affecting employment financial issues. Frank was against the revision. He said, "To the extent every employee is a potential lawsuit, that is a cost of hiring an employee. As those costs go up, employers will hire fewer employees, and charge "insurance" to the employees they do hire by reducing their wages to account for the possibility of a future lawsuit. If the misnamed "Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act" passes, the vast majority of workers will be worse off, as money that would have gone to pay employees will instead go to pay attorneys." The law was eventually passed in January 2009. Also in 2008, Frank objected to the Hot Coffee class action settlement over the "hidden sex scenes" in the video game Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, in part on the grounds that the settlement sought $1 million for attorneys' fees while paying the class members less than $27,000. The New York Times quoted him as saying that it was possible that the plaintiff's class action attorneys were "selling out the class for attorneys’ fees." According to Kotaku, the settlement was denied by the court.

In February 2011, Frank was part of a three-member panel at Vanderbilt University in Tennessee which consisted of himself, James Blumstein, who is a law professor at the university, and Charlie Ross, a former State Senator in Mississippi, presenting their perspectives on how the business and people of the state would benefit from tort reform. Frank and the other panelists argued that "Tennessee’s current civil justice system is both inconsistent and unsustainable" and it was argued that, based on reforms in other states, a reform in this area could result in 30,000 jobs a year or 577 jobs each week in Tennessee and significantly improve the health system.

Issues and conflicts

Frank's outlook on reform has drawn criticism from the CEO of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America, Jon Haber, who believes that his views on tort reform are an "attack on the Constitution of the United States". Haber said about Frank, "While defending large corporations should be expected, his suggestion that consumers would benefit by limiting their access to the nation's courts is too preposterous to let go unchallenged. The claim that the civil justice system is overrun by lawsuits that may transform the nation into a "banana republic", as Frank implies without irony or facts, is just plain laughable". Frank defended himself on the PointofLaw.com weblog which he regularly contributes, maintained by Olson and sponsored by the Manhattan Institute, "I presume Haber doesn't support the silliest of the lawsuits I suggested, so the question isn't whether the right should be limited (since we would agree that it should), but under what circumstances it should be limited. I suggest that consumers who have suffered no injury not be permitted to sue under "consumer fraud" statutes. Haber has no response to this. At no point does Haber specifically defend the lawsuits I actually criticize."

Haber was critical of Frank's criticism of victims of Hurricane Katrina for pressuring insurance companies to pay what they feel is owed under their homeowners policy. Frank responded by saying, "Almost every home-owners insurance policy in the United States has a clause excluding coverage for flood damage. (A government-subsidized flood insurance program makes it uneconomic for private insurance companies to include flood insurance in homeowners' policies. Insurers thus only offer the government policy.) Every insurance holder in America benefits from these exclusions by being able to receive affordable insurance for non-flood risks, because the price of the policy reflects the level of risk incurred by the insurer. Nevertheless, trial lawyers egged on by Mississippi's state attorney general, Jim Hood seek to retroactively rewrite the policies by suing insurers to force them to pay money for a risk they did not agree to assume."

Haber was also critical on Frank's views on the long drawn-out Vioxx case. He said, "Frank defends Merck, his former client, which sold an anti-inflammation drug called Vioxx, all while hiding from doctors the fact that the drug was unsafe. Even though one FDA official said Vioxx led to as many as 55,000 deaths, Frank wants to limit the right of Americans to hold liable wrong-doers like Merck." Frank initially defended himself on the PointofLaw.com weblog and claimed that the "55,000" number was completely invented, and that Merck never hid anything from doctors that it knew itself. In an August 2011 article published in the The Washington Examiner, he further summed up his reasons for defending Merck. "A final sordid chapter in the tort litigation over Vioxx closed, as Judge Eldon Fallon divvied up $315 million to be paid to the plaintiffs' attorneys who worked on the litigation. This sum was in addition to the more than $1.2 billion already paid to such attorneys. When you add in what Merck paid to plaintiffs and for its own attorneys, the Vioxx litigation cost it more than $7 billion. Yet Merck almost certainly did not do anything wrong. Even as an unsympathetic corporate defendant, it won the vast majority of cases that went to trial, and another dozen or more that plaintiffs' attorneys dismissed on the eve of trial rather than risk the publicity of a certain loss. Even in the handful of cases that Merck lost at trial, such as the $253 million verdict in the Ernst case that generated much of the publicity that led to tens of thousands of cases being filed, Merck won reversals of most of those on appeal because the verdicts were based on conclusory junk-science expert testimony that should not have been admitted into evidence."

In a Wall Street Journal opinion piece in 2007, Frank said that the Department of Treasury and SEC should urge the Supreme Court to reject expanded securities litigation liability in Stoneridge v. Scientific-Atlanta. Congressmen John Conyers, Jr. and Barney Frank criticized this op-ed in their saying that Frank's argument substituted policy considerations for the plain text of statute. Frank rebutted the allegation on the Overlawyered weblog. Also in 2007, Frank posted an article regarding tort trial lawyer Arthur Alan Wolk on Overlawyered, a website he has regularly posted on since 2003 about tort reform issues, that prompted Wolk to sue Frank for defamation. The case was dismissed as barred by the one year statute of limitations. On appeal, the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, the Society of Professional Journalists, the American Society of News Editors, the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Associated Press, and law professors and First Amendment experts Eugene Volokh and Glenn Reynolds, among others, filed amicus briefs in support of the defendants saying that there was no actionable claim of libel.

Frank has also been outspoken on several unrelated issues. In August 2007 he criticized Michael Moore, and dismissed his documentary film Sicko as "misleading numerical gloss." He is also critical of Misplaced Pages and has written, "Misplaced Pages in general suffers from a severe bias; articles about controversial topics reward persistence over accuracy."

Center for Class Action Fairness

"Operating largely on donations, the CCAF in a short period has gained a reputation as a formidable check on highly questionable practices that have gone unchallenged precisely because they are the product of collusive parties and allied judges. The advent of a committed and aggressive watchdog like CCAF is, to those familiar with these scams, like sunlight and Lysol."

In 2009, Frank founded the public-interest non-profit law firm Center for Class Action Fairness (CCAF) to represent consumers dissatisfied with their counsel in class actions and class action settlements. According to The American Lawyer, as of March 2011, the CCAF had filed objections to 17 settlements, with eight objections pending in federal district courts, and had been successful on six of them.The firm is described by Frank as "a "guerrilla" operation with a shoestring budget", and a project of a 501(c)(3) organization which pays him as an independent contractor to manage the project, relying on donors from charitable foundations and independent individuals to fund it. He has also said, "The class action landscape has long included some “professional settlement objectors” who target large cases in hopes of extracting a percentage of the attorney fees as a reward. But that doesn’t solve the problem. The niche isn’t being filled unless you find somebody crazy like me who is willing to spend dozens of hours of his own time and hundreds of dollars of his own money to make a claim he can’t benefit from."

Frank, at his own expense, traveled to New York and filed a successful objection to the proposed class action settlement in the Grand Theft Auto consumer fraud case where class members who had bought a “Grand Theft Auto” computer game with a hidden, sexually explicit easter egg would have received less than $30,000, while the plaintiffs' attorneys would receive $1 million in legal fees. Spurred by complaints about excessive sexual content in the game, class action attorneys sued its makers, Take Two Interactive Software. Although the software giant had received only $27,000 in claims from irate consumers, it agreed to a settlement in which the plaintiffs’ lawyers themselves would collect $1 million. Frank's case succeeded and the settlement was halted.

CCAF has objected to settlements throughout the United States, in cases where class action lawyers receive cash payments but the plaintiff class receives only discount coupons for further products and services from the defendant company. CCAF argues in those cases that few of the coupons are ever used, so the actual payment to plaintiffs is much lower than the stated amounts. In 2010, CCAF successfully objected to a coupon settlement in a Central District of California class action alleging consumer fraud in the sale of Honda Civic Hybrids; the settlement would have provided $2.95 million in attorneys' fees, but only coupons to the class. Frank was reported to have said, "coupons are nearly worthless because so few of the intended beneficiaries will find it worthwhile to fill in all the necessary paperwork." The CCAF has also been involved in the case surrounding the allegations of email spamming by Ameritrade in 2009. The case brought Frank before Northern District of California Chief Judge Vaughn Walker, where he challenged the fairness of a TD Ameritrade settlement, which consists of coupons for antivirus software. Frank "argued that the court should not award, or should at least limit, the requested $1.87 million in attorney fees."Judge Walker rejected the Ameritrade settlement in October 2009.

"In these desperate economic times, we're looking for ways to stimulate the economy. One cheap way to do so without increasing government debt is to stop making it profitable for trial lawyers to bring meritless cases that impose what is effectively a multibillion-dollar litigation tax on productive sectors of the economy. We can't litigate our way to prosperity."

In 2010, Frank and the CCAF, citing American Law Institute guidelines on cy-près, objected to Apple's settlement of a securities class action over their backdating, arguing that giving money to third parties affiliated with the class counsel instead of to the class was a breach of fiduciary duty. Frank stated that, "The magnitude of the settlement compared to the original claims demonstrates that it is an extortionate nuisance settlement, being made because it would cost more to defend the suit than to pay the attorneys to go away." In response to CCAF's objection, the parties amended the settlement by reallocating the $2.5 million originally proposed as cy-près to class members; the court awarded CCAF attorneys' fees for their role in winning $2.5 million for the class.

In April 2011, Frank and the CCAF filed an objection to the $3.4 billion taxpayer funded Cobell Indian Trust settlement, which the federal government had agreed to in December 2009, which had established a $1.5 billion Trust Accounting and Administration Fund and a $1.9 billion Trust Land Consolidation Fund to buy fractionated land interests. Under the agreed settlement, a maximum of $99.9 million had been allocated for the lawyers fees but they had demanded $223 million. Acting on behalf of Kimberly Craven, a Sisseton-Wahpeton Ovate tribe member, Frank argued that the case was about pure greed, stating that it included "an ‘outrageous’ fee request that has resulted in bipartisan criticism" and that the Class Counsel were "more interested in maximizing their personal recovery than the interests of the class."

In May 2011, the Center for Class Action Fairness filed a lengthy brief in Missouri, challenging a settlement which gave lawyers who sued A.G. Edwards $21 million in fees for negotiating an agreement that provided a total of $6 million for some customers and three annual coupons valued at $8.22 apiece for the rest. St. Louis Judge Angela T. Quigless of the Missouri Court of Appeals rejected the case, ruling that, “In cases involving complex litigation or in the class action context, a one-third contingent fee award is not unreasonable.”

In August 2011, the CCAF successfully won a case at a federal appeals court in California in which they objected to class action settlements and attorneys' fees in litigation regarding Bluetooth headsets. The original case over the headsets had been filed when lawyers had noticed news articles about potential hearing loss and headsets and filed suits on behalf of millions of Motorola and Plantronics customers. The prior settlement would have effectively paid consumers nothing but given the lawyers who negotiated the pact $850,000 in fees, amended by Frank and his firm.Frank regards the case as a milestone in his fight to prevent abuses. Frank has also filed an objection to a settlement in an antitrust case against Sirius XM Radio, which provided nothing for the plaintiffs, but a 100 percent payout of $13 million for the attorneys.

Writing

In 2003, together with Walter Olson, he began contributing regularly to Overlawyered, a legal weblog that advocates tort reform. His work is found in law reviews, the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, The American, and National Review Online. As head of AEI's Liability Project his opinions and analysis of liability litigation have been quoted in the New York Times, BusinessWeek, The Washington Examiner, and the New York Law Journal. Areas of interest and expertise include product liability, asbestos litigation, medical malpractice, and pharmaceuticals such as Vioxx and he has been outspoken on health issues.

Frank has written articles in several books and journals, including work in the books by the American Bar Association, 2002 Annual Review of Antitrust Developments (2003) and Market Power Handbook: Competition Law and Economic Foundations (2005). Articles written for journals include "The Economic Interest Test and Collective Action Problems in Antitrust Tie-in Cases", written whilst at the University of Chicago (1994), "A Taxonomy of Obesity Litigation" (2006), "West Virginia Supreme Court Strikes Down Learned Intermediary Rule" with James M. Beck (October 2007), and "Did the Right Make America a Lawsuit Nation?" in Thomas Geoghegan’s See You in Court: How the Right Made America a Lawsuit Nation, (2008).

According to the book Game Change: Obama and the Clintons, McCain and Palin, and the Race of a Lifetime, on the weekend before John McCain made his vice-presidential pick, McCain's advisor Arthur Culvahouse asked Ted Frank to prepare a written report on Sarah Palin, "Thrown together from scratch in less than forty hours, the document highlighted her vulnerabilities: "Democrats upset at McCain's anti-Obama 'celebrity' advertisements will mock Palin as an inexperienced beauty queen whose main national exposure was a photo-spread in Vogue in February 2008. Even in campaigning for governor, she made a number of gaffes, and the Anchorage Daily News expressed concern that she often seemed 'unprepared or over her head' in a campaign run by a friend." " The book also says that Frank worked on the vetting of Senator Joe Lieberman.

Public appearances

Frank is regularly invited to speak at various different universities and societies. In 2006, under the AEI, Frank was outspoken against medical malpractice. He has since been invited to speak on class action issues and related cases in venues such as the Washington Legal Foundation, the Federalist Society of Washington, D.C. and Houston, Vanderbilt University, the University of Alberta Faculty of Law, the American Constitution Society and at the federal societies of University of Chicago Law School, Florida State University College of Law, George Washington University Law School, Stetson University Law School, and the University of Miami Law School. Between December 5-7, 2010, Frank was invited to speak at the 5th Annual Judicial Symposium on Civil Justice Issues.

Frank has made several appearances on national television programmes and channels, discussing litigation and other issues concerning him, most of which have previously been highlighted. He has appeared on ABC News Now, Good Morning America on ABC, The World on BBC4, Your World with Neil Cavuto on Fox News, RNN-TV News, the Politics and Money programme of Bloomberg TV and has made five appearances on C-SPAN with the AEI. Frank has also contributed to numerous discussions on the radio and podcasts.

References

1. ^ Rizo, Chris (24 February 2010). "Group puts the brakes on Honda class action settlement". The Southeast Texas Record. Retrieved 21 August 2010.
2. ^ Fisher, Daniel (September 21, 2009). "A Lawyer Who Tries to Block Settlements". Forbes. p. 36. Retrieved 25 September 2009.
3. ^ Bronstad, Amanda (10 July 2009). "Judge Approves Bluetooth Settlement, but Balks at Attorney Fees Award". National Law Journal. Retrieved 25 September 2009.
4. Lattman, Peter (30 October 30 2006). "Trial Lawyers Defend Themselves While Taking On Terrorism". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 25 August 2007. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
5. Cincinnati Magazine. Emmis Communications. July 2009. p. 108. ISSN 07468210 Parameter error in {{issn}}: Invalid ISSN.. Retrieved 20 August 2011.
6. Brickman, Lester (31 January 2011). Lawyer Barons: What Their Contingency Fees Really Cost America. Cambridge University Press. p. 230. ISBN 978-0-521-18949-1. Retrieved 20 August 2011.
7. ^ "Challenging Cy Pres Scams". Connecticut Law Tribune. 22 November 2010. Retrieved 20 August 2011. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
8. "New Members Elected". ALI Reporter (American Law Institute). Retrieved March 23, 2009. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
9. ^ Heilemann, John and Halperin, Mark (11 January 2010). Game Change: Obama and the Clintons, McCain and Palin, and the Race of a Lifetime (1 ed.). Harper. ISBN 0061733636.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
10. Hurwitz, Johanna (October 1999). Much Ado About Aldo. Turtleback Books. ISBN 978-0-8335-4003-4. Retrieved 21 August 2011.
11. "Resume". Ted Frank.com. Retrieved 20 August 2011.
12. ^ Special to the New York Times (28 May 1988). "'Pigtown' at Brandeis U. Protests Food Policy". New York Times. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
13. O'Brien, John (July 16, 2007), Attorney: W. Va. SC ignoring law for benefit of trial lawyers, The West Virginia Record. Retrieved September 1 2007.
14. Frank wrote a student comment, "The Economic Interest Test and Collective Action Problems in Antitrust Tie-in Cases", 61 U. Chi. L. Rev. 639.
15. Baseball Prospectus '97. Joe Sheehan, Clay Davenport, and Gary Huckabay, Eds. Washington, D.C.: Potomac Books Inc. (former Brassey’s Inc.), 1997. ISBN 0-9655674-0-0.
16. Gary Huckabay (11 July 2003). "6-4-3:State of the Prospectus, July 2003". Baseball Prospectus.
17. ^ "Ted Frank Biography". American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research. Retrieved 21 August 2011.
18. ^ Zahorsky, Rachel (1 April 2010). "Unsettling Advocate". ABA Journal. Retrieved 21 August 2010.
19. "The incentives of a class action". West Virginia Record. 4 December 2011. Retrieved 21 August 2011.
20. Theodore H. Frank (2006). "A Taxonomy of Obesity Litigation". University of Arkansas at Little Rock Law Review. Retrieved 26 August 2007. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
21. Nelson, Frank (4 December 2011). "When the Wheels of Justice Grind Out … Coupons". Miller-McCune. Retrieved 23 August 2011.
22. ^ Reeves, Martha E. (6 May 2010). Women in Business: Theory, Case Studies, and Legal Challenges. Taylor & Francis. p. 106. ISBN 978-0-415-77803-9. Retrieved 20 August 2011.
23. "Overlawyered Disses Hot Coffee Class Action Settlement". Gamepolitics.com. 29 April 2008. Retrieved 23 August 2008.
24. "Did Lawyers Inflate Fees in Hot Coffee Class Action Suit?". Gamepolitics.com. 27 May 2008. Retrieved 23 August 2008.
25. "Grand Theft Auto: Class Action Settlement - $26,505 for the unrepresented class, $1 million fee request". Overlawyered. 26 May 2008. See also Brief of Objector Theodore H. Frank in Opposition to Plaintiff's Memorandum in Support of Proposed Settlement and Award of Attorneys' Fees and Expenses In re Grand Theft Auto Video Game Consumer Litigation (No. II), 1:06-md-1739 (SWK), S.D.N.Y.
26. ^ Glater, Jonathan D. (25 June 2008). "Hidden Sex Scenes Draw Ho-Hum, Except From Lawyers". New York Times. Retrieved 25 September 2009.
27. Michael McWhertor (5 August 2008). ""Hot Coffee" Class Action Suit Squashed By The Court". Kotaku. Retrieved 23 March 2009.
28. Morrow, Mike (23 February). "Talking Tort Reform". Tennessee News Report. Retrieved 21 August 2011. {{cite web}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
29. "Lawsuit Abuse Reform Will Give Tennesseans Long Overdue Benefits". Tennessee Center for Policy Research. March 2011. Retrieved 21 August 2011.
30. ^ Jon Haber (21 October 2006). "A Response to 'End Open-Ended Litigation'". Washington Post.
31. PointofLaw.com masthead
32. ^ "A Response to 'End Open-Ended Litigation'". Point of Law. 21 October 2006. Retrieved 21 August 2011.
33. ^ Frank, Ted (17 August 2011). "Manhattan Moment: Win or lose, trial lawyers get millions in Vioxx fees". The Washington Examiner. Retrieved 21 August 2011. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help) Cite error: The named reference "WE11" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page).
34. Frank, Ted (31 May 2007). "Arbitrary and Unfair". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 23 August 2011. {{cite news}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
35. Stoneridge v. Scientific-Atlanta amicus filed, United States House of Representatives, 30 July 2007 {{citation}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help)
36. "MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE A BRIEF AS AMICI CURIAE AFTER THE FILING DEADLINE AND BRIEF AMICI CURIAE OF THE HONORABLE JOHN CONYERS, JR. AND BARNEY FRANK, IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER" (PDF). University of Denver Sturm College of Law. 30 July 2007. Retrieved 23 August 2011.
37. "Stoneridge: Wherein I am a footnote". Overlawyered.com. 31 July 2007. Retrieved 23 August 2011. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
38. "Wolk v. Olson" (PDF). United States District Court Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Retrieved 23 August 2011.
39. "BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE THE REPORTERS COMMITTEE FOR FREEDOM OF THE PRESS AND 19 MEDIA ORGANIZATIONS IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS-APPELLEES" (PDF). Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. 6 December 2010. Retrieved 21 August 2011.
40. "Journalist group lends voice to Wolk libel case". Philadelphia Business Journal. Retrieved 21 August 2011.
41. Goldberg, Kevin (16 December 2010). "ASNE joins amicus briefs tackling unusual issues". American Society of News Editors. Retrieved 21 August 2011.
42. ^ Wolk v. Olson, No. 10-3352 (3d Cir.) docket
43. Volokh, Eugene (17 January 2011). "Lawyer Seeking Order That "Will Compel ... Volokh to Remove His ... Blog (Post)". Volokh.com. Retrieved 21 June 2011.
44. Frank, Ted (8 August 2007). ""Sicko's Box Office Numbers are Fuzzy, Too"". The American. Retrieved 21 August 2011. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
45. ""Stephen Colbert Sparks Wiki War"". CBS News. 8 August 2006. Retrieved 21 August 2006.
46. Frank, Ted (3 August 2006). "Trial lawyer "Wikiality"". Overlawyered.com. Retrieved 21 December 2007.
47. ^ Beck, Susan (4 March 2011). "A Conversation With Class Action Objector". The American Lawyer. Retrieved 23 August 2011. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
48. ^ Moser, Kate (23 September 2009). "Class Action Avenger Discusses Coupon Crusades". Legal Pad. Cal Law. Retrieved 25 September 2009.
49. "Hardly a 'class' act Legally Speaking". Rockwall Herald-Banner (Texas). 6 May 2011. Retrieved 20 August 2011.
50. Grossman, Andrew (22 December 2008). "Grand Theft Class Action: Game Over". Heritage Foundation. Retrieved 25 September 2009.
51. Lat, David (10 August 2009). "The Class Action Avenger: Ted Frank's Cool New Job". Above the Law. Retrieved 2009-09-25.
52. Grossman, Andrew (22 December 2008). "Grand Theft Class Action: Game Over". The Heritage Foundation. Retrieved 24 August 2011.
53. Bill McLellan (23 June 2010). "Lawyers win big in class action suit". St. Louis Post-Dispatch.
54. Bronstad, Amanda (24 February 2010). "Civic Hybrid class settlement doesn't pass muster". National Law Journal.
55. True v. American Honda Motor Co., __ F. Supp. 2d __, No. 07-CV-0287 (C.D. Cal. 2010).
56. "EDITORIAL: Lawyering unto perdition". Washington Times. 28 December 2010. Retrieved 20 August 2011. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
57. TD Ameritrade Accountholder Litigation, No. 07-CV-2852, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 126407 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 23, 2009).
58. ^ Carney, John (21 October 2010). "Is Apple's $20.5 Million Backdating Settlement Illegal?". CNBC. Retrieved 21 August 2010.
59. ^ Frankel, Alison (30 November 2010). "Legal Activist Ted Frank Cries Conflict of Interest, Forces O'Melveny and Grant & Eisenhofer to Modify Apple Securities Class Action Deal". Retrieved 21 August 2011.
60. "IN RE APPLE INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION" (PDF). Court House News. Retrieved 21 August 2011.
61. ^ Bommarito, Kate (20 April 2011). "Objection Filed Against Cobell Indian Trust Class Action Settlement Agreement". Plains Daily. Retrieved 20 August 2011.
62. ^ Fisher, Daniel (1 June 2011). "Appeals Court Approves $21 Million Fee In A.G. Edwards Case". Forbes. Retrieved 23 August 2011. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
63. ^ "Headset Settlement That Paid Lawyers, Not Clients, Is Rejected". Forbes. 19 August 2011. Retrieved 20 August 2011. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
64. "Appeal challenges Bluetooth settlement as self-dealing". The National Law Journal. 27 April 2010. Retrieved 20 August 2011. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
65. ^ Freddoso, David (23 August 2011). "Days numbered for trial lawyers getting outrageous paydays". The Washington Examiner. Retrieved 24 August 2011. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
66. Liptak, Adam (15 October 2007). "Competing for Clients, and Paying by the Click". New York Times.
67. Kharif, Olga (20 August 2007). "Cell-Phone Contract Disputes Heat Up". Business Week.
68. Mauro, Tony (21 August 2007). "Observers Speculate Justices Could Rejoin Securities Issue". New York Law Journal.
69. Loyola University of Chicago. School of Law; Loyola University of Chicago. Center for Public Service Law (2004). Loyola public interest law reporter. School of Law, Loyola University Chicago. p. 49. Retrieved 20 August 2011.
70. Anderson, Justin (16 July 2010). "Ban on Atrazine would stagger agriculture experts say". The Madison Record. Retrieved 24 August 2011. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
71. American Bar Association. Section of Antitrust Law (25 April 2003). Annual review of ... antitrust law developments. American Bar Association. p. 3. ISBN 978-1-59031-226-1. Retrieved 23 August 2011.
72. American Bar Association. Section of Antitrust Law (2005). Market power handbook: competition law and economic foundations. American Bar Association. p. 8. ISBN 978-1-59031-521-7. Retrieved 23 August 2011.
73. ^ "Ted Frank CV". Ted Frank.com. {{cite web}}: |access-date= requires |url= (help); Missing or empty |url= (help)
74. "The Economic Interest Test and Collective Action Problems in Antitrust Tie-in Cases,Spring, 1994 61 U. Chi. L. Rev. 639". Lexis Nexis. Retrieved 23 August 2011.
75. "A Taxonomy of Obesity Litigation" (PDF). American Enterprise Institute. 25 August 2006. Retrieved 23 August 2011.
76. "SHOULD WE KEEP THIS COURT? AN ECONOMIC EXAMINATION OF RECENT DECISIONS MADE BY THE WEST VIRGINIA SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS" (PDF). West Virginia University. Retrieved 23 August 2011. {{cite web}}: Unknown parameter |authors= ignored (help)
77. "Schedule for 2009-2010". University of Chicago Law School Federalist Society. Retrieved 23 August 2011.
78. "Schedule for 2008 - 2009". University of Chicago Law School Federal Society. Retrieved 21 August 2011.
79. "Stetson Welcomes Family and Friends to Campus" (PDF). Stetson University Law School. November 2009. Retrieved 23 August 2011.
80. "5TH ANNUAL JUDICIAL SYMPOSIUM ON CIVIL JUSTICE ISSUES GEORGE MASON JUDICIAL EDUCATION PROGRAM DECEMBER 5-7, 2010" (PDF). Journal of Law, Economics & Policy. Retrieved 23 August 2011. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)
81. ""The Cutter Incident" , [[American Enterprise Institute]]". C-SPAN. 23 January 2006. Retrieved 23 August 2011. {{cite web}}: URL–wikilink conflict (help)
82. ""The Vioxx Settlement" , [[American Enterprise Institute]]". C-SPAN. 8 January 2008. Retrieved 23 August 2011. {{cite web}}: URL–wikilink conflict (help)

External links

• TedFrank.com - Personal homepage
• Center for Class Action Fariness
• Manhattan Institute homepage
• Federalist Society biography
• Overlawyered.com - Blog on the U.S. litigation system.
• Pointoflaw.com - web magazine sponsored by the Manhattan Institute on the U.S. litigation system.

Template:Persondata

• Living people
• 1968 births
• American lawyers
• American legal writers
• American bloggers
• Brandeis University alumni
• University of Chicago Law School alumni