Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.
An objection to a proposed FitFlop class action lawsuit settlement claiming the agreement did not match the standards of damage calculations, that the Class counsel acted unfairly in communications and that the class action lawyers’ fees were excessive was found to be without merit by U.S. District Judge Thomas J. Whelan, who overruled the objection.
Addressing objector Michael Narkin’s allegation that the proposed settlement was unfair, the judge’s order noted that customers could receive anywhere from the difference between a regular shoe and FitFlop shoes up to the full retail price that they paid, which he considered fair. In achieving this result, he noted that the Class counsel had achieved their goal of a remedy for the Class and that the fees met the standard established by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which governs the court in which he presides.
The FitFlop class action lawsuit settlement resolved allegations first brought in 2011 that the company’s “microwobbleboard” technology used in the midsole did not provide the claimed “variety of health benefits including improved posture, increased muscle activation and toning and reduced joint strain” beginning in 2007, and that customers were bilked out of the premium added to the price of a normal pair of sandals.
With the objection denied, the terms of the agreement to resolve the FitFlop false ad class action lawsuit remain the same. Anyone who bought an item of FitFlop Footwear between Jan. 1, 2008 and Jan. 8 of this year may visit the settlement page to find out how to submit their claims. The value of the award varies from $25 to $100 and is dependent on which type of sandals were purchased as well as how many using the microwaffleboard technology you may have purchased.
Visit the FitFlop Footwear Class Action Settlement page to learn more. No proof of purchase is necessary for two pairs or less of eligible FitFlop footwear.
The plaintiffs are represented by class action lawyers Timothy G. Blood, Leslie E. Hurst and Thomas J. O’Reardon II of Blood Hurst & O’Reardon LLP, and Michael Liskow and Janine L. Pollack of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP.
The FitFlop False Ad Class Action Lawsuit is Charlice Arnold, et al. v. FitFlop USA LLC, Case No. 3:11-cv-00973, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California.
UPDATE: Payments for the FitFlop class action settlement were mailed to eligible Class Members the first week of February 2015. Average settlement checks were valued at $73.25, according to Top Class Actions viewers. Congrats to everyone who got PAID!
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING
Top Class Actions is a Proud Member of the American Bar Association
LEGAL INFORMATION IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
©2008 – 2024 Top Class Actions® LLC
Various Trademarks held by their respective owners
This website is not intended for viewing or usage by European Union citizens.
5 thoughts onObjection Fails to Stop FitFlop Class Action Lawsuit Settlement
UPDATE: Payments for the FitFlop class action settlement were mailed to eligible Class Members the first week of February 2015. Average settlement checks were valued at $73.25, according to Top Class Actions viewers. Congrats to everyone who got PAID!
Received my settlement check today! $146.50. Thank you topclassactions!
any payment for the distribution
Any updated since 7/20./14???
When are the payments going to be because the objection was over ruled?