Appellate Division Held Objector Not Entitled to Fees. Though we do not venture out of California often, we do report on an interesting case that was just argued in the class action area in front of the New York Court of Appeals (which, for those of you unfamiliar with the New York system, […]
No Bright-Line Rule Is Set, But Timing of Motions Must Take into Account Timing of Objections to Actual Fee Request Submissions on Due Process Grounds. This next case should be of keen interest to class action practitioners. The Ninth Circuit, in In re Mercury Interactive Corp. Sec. Litig., Case No. 08-17372 (9th
Fourth District, Division 1 So Rules, Assuming 998 Offers Are Valid in a Certified Class Situation. Nelson v. Pearson Ford Co., Case No. D054369 (4th Dist., Div. 1 July 15, 2010) (certified for publication) is an interesting decision where significant fees were awarded in a class action involving a California consumer-shifting fee statute. However,
Second District, Division 2 Finds No Higher Award is Warranted. In Knik v. Marriott International, Inc., Case No. B220529 (2d Dist., Div. 2 July 14, 2010) (unpublished), plaintiff’s attorneys in a wage/hour class action obtained an award of $93,161 in attorney’s fees in a case where the gross settlement amount was $700,000. They wanted
USDJ Chooses Lodestar in Wage/Hour Class Action Fee Recovery Settlement. Our friend and fellow blogger H. Scott Leviant has reported on Anderson v. Nextel Retail Stores in his June 30, 2010 post at The Complex Litigator website. There, U.S. District Judge Stephen Wilson, in a common fund wage/hour class action settlement, chose the
O’Melveny and Western Center on Law & Poverty Reap Award, With O’Melveny Donating a Portion to Non-Profit Causes. O’Melveny & Myers LLP and the Western Center on Law & Poverty teamed up to prosecute a class action against Orange County’s Social Services Agency with respect to more expeditious processing and approval of food stamp
Court of Appeal Also Decides Prejudgment Interest Not Allowable on Fee Awards. Okay, so who says we don’t try to give you readers a synopsis of decisions (even though some might be a little wordy)? The next decision—Woosley v. State of California, Case No. B209890 (2d Dist., Div. 5 Apr. 16, 2010) (unpublished)—involves some
$19 Million in Fee Spent in McCourt’s Divorce. Frank McCourt has estimated his divorce-related expenses at $5-$10 million, while Jamie McCourt has estimated her expenses as $9 million (with Jamie asking Frank to pay them), all in the on-going and apparently acrimonious divorce proceeding between Los Angeles Dodger owner Frank and former officer Jamie.
$1.25 Billion Settlement Yields Potential Fee Recovery of 4 to 7 % The U.S. Government announced a tentative $1.25 billion ($1,250,000,000) settlement to resolve a racial discrimination action by black farmers who were denied access to USDA loan programs and denied participation in an earlier class action settlement. Although still subject to congressional authorization
Nonconflicted Attorneys Get Award of Fees; Conflicted Attorneys Do Receive Reimbursement of Over $1.2 Million in Expenses. In our April 26, 2009 post, we reported on Rodriguez v. West Publishing Co., 563 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2009), where class representative incentive agreements creating conflicts of interests required reconsideration of fee awards to both
