A judge has signed off on a proposed class action settlement against Facebook, approving the establishment of a $20 million settlement fund that will pay $15 to each of the roughly 614,000 Facebook members who submitted valid claims in the "Sponsored Stories" case.  The three named plaintiffs in the case each will receive $1,500 in settlement awards, down from their request of $12,500 each.  Meanwhile, the lawyers representing the plaintiffs saw their award of attorneys fees drop from the requested amount of 37.5% (potentially $7,500,000) of the settlement fund, less certain expenses, to a "generally considered benchmark" of 25% (potentially $5,000,000) of the settlement fund, less certain expenses.

The case before the United States District Court for the Northern District of California arose out of a dispute over Facebook's allegedly improper use of its members' profile pictures in ads for "Sponsored Stories."  Judge Richard Seeborg granted final approval of the parties' settlement order, requiring Facebook to set up the settlement fund, pay attorneys fees, costs and incentive awards, and amend its Statement of Rights and Responsibilities. 

—Source: fraleyfacebooksettlement.com

A former intern is suing rap star Sean (Diddy) Combs' record company, alleging she was used like a regular employee and should have been paid.

Rashida Salaam worked three to four days a week, from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. each day, for Bad Boy Entertainment from January 2012 to May 2012. Her duties included "picking up lunch and coffee" and "running personal errands" for paid employees.  Although she agreed to take the job knowing it was an unpaid internship, Salaam has filed a class-action lawsuit against the record company on grounds that it violated minimum-wage laws. Her lawsuit seeks back wages plus interest for the hours she and other unpaid interns worked.  According to Salaam, fellow unpaid interns wrapped presents and decorated the office during holidays; they received no training.

“I have no animosity against Bad Boy. But I was taken advantage of as far as wages go. I was naive,” Salaam said.  "Money doesn't mean anything to me.  I'm taking this risk for all the interns out there."

When an intern receives no wage, “the primary recipient of the benefits should be the intern — not the company,” said Jeffrey Brown of Leeds Brown Law, the firm representing Salaam.

—Source: NYDailyNews.com

A Manhattan lawyer who sued his clients for attorneys fees has been found to have grossly overcharged his clients and was recently ordered to repay the couple over $21,000.

Attorney Ronny Buni was representing Gerald and Vivian Kleinerman in a real estate battle with their co-op board. According to news reports, over $20,000 in legal fees was amassed early in the case and Buni insisted on additional payments.  As the legal fees dispute escalated, an arbitrator stepped in and ordered Buni to repay the couple $5,000.  Buni refused to back down and filed suit against the Kleinermans.

Now, Buni has been ordered by the court to repay the Kleinermans $21,621 plus interest from May 2011 and he was taken to task for his "remarkable billing practices." Manhattan Civil Court Judge Frank Nervo ruled that some of Buni's charges for "legal research" amounted to no more than Buni brushing up on Law 101.  The “legal research (Buni) billed for was not, in fact, research, but simply an attempt to familiarize himself with principles of law” that “he should have known,” the judge wrote.  Legal fees also included billing for time Buni spent calling another lawyer for advice on how to handle the case.

Buni also charged the couple for “innumerable emails” he sent them, including some where he was “berating” them for input into their real estate case the judge deemed perfectly reasonable, the judge said. Worse yet, Buni billed the Kleinermans for three hours of arguing with the judge and his clerk about a scheduling conflict -- at $300 an hour.

Kleinerman said the ruling “restored my faith in the justice system.”

—Source: New York Daily News

A San Francisco area judge has dismissed a lawsuit against a fitness data social networking site after concluding the bicyclist who died while using the site assumed risk.

According to news reports, William "Kim" Flint was killed when his bicycle collided with a car on a downhill stretch of road while he was apparently trying to reclaim his King of the Mountain status through a ride-tracking site operated by Strava. Flint's parents sued Strava, claiming its app encourages dangerous behavior and fails to provide adequate warnings that certain road conditions are unsuitable for racing.

Judge Marla Miller disagreed, saying, "Mr. Flint assumed the risks of bicycling and the defendant has shown that bicycling is an inherent risky activity."

Following the ruling, Strava spokesman Mark Riedy issued a statement for the company: "The death of Kim Flint was a tragic accident and we reiterate our sincere condolences to the family.  We are extremely gratified by the judge's ruling, which demonstrates there was no case against the company. ... We ask all athletes to exercise common sense when they are running and riding and to encourage good behavior within the community."

—Source:  roadcc.com