Cases: Class Actions

Class Actions: Plaintiff’s Amicus Curiae Work In Related Action Was Proper Basis For Additional Fee Award

Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5), Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

Sixth District Also Finds No Abuse In Fee Award In Previous Action Under Private Attorney General Statute.      The next case involves the extent to which successful attorneys in a plaintiff’s class action should be awarded fees for amicus curiae work in another action that dealt with the same issues and eventually led to a […]

Class Action: Class Representative Incentive Agreements That Created Conflicting Interests Required New Consideration Of Fee Award To Objectors And Class Counsel

Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Ethics

Ninth Circuit Requires Reexamination of Fee Denial to Objector’s Counsel and Fee Award to Class Counsel.      For the plaintiff class action practitioners out there which follow our blog, the next decision is must reading. Not only does it highlight the fiduciary and ethical duties involved in the process, but counsels that incentive agreements should

Class Actions: Third District Publishes Sutter Health Uninsured Pricing Case

Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

  Decision Discussed in Our January 28, 2009 Post.      In our January 28, 2009 post, we discussed Sutter Health Uninsured Pricing Case, where the Third District affirmed a $4 million class action fee award that represented 1.4% of the settlement fund recovery and a 2.52 multiplier enhancement on a $1.4 million lodestar.      Yesterday,

Federal Class Actions: Fee Reversionary Settlement Clauses And Percentage Of Recovery Considered By Ninth Circuit In Unpublished Decision

Cases: Class Actions

Court of Appeals Sustains Validity of Fee Reversion Clause Based on Exceptional Results and Affirms Percentage of Recovery Fee Award.      The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals recently considered two attorney’s fees issues in the context of a class action, albeit in an unpublished memorandum decision. Glass v. UBS Financial Services, Inc., Case No. 07-15278

Attorney’s Fee Ethics: Orange County Law Article Covers Wide Range Of Topics

Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Ethics, Cases: Liens for Attorney Fees, Cases: Retainer Agreements

February 2009 Article by Carole Buckner Covers Many Ethical Issues.      In the February 2009 edition of the Orange County Lawyer, Carole J. Buckner writes an article, “Ethics Opinions Provide Guidance in Resolving Attorneys’ Fee Issues,” covering a wide-ranging array of ethical issues relating to attorney’s fees.      Here is a synopsis of issues discussed

Class Action: Court Of Appeal Sustains 1.4% Fund Recovery And 2.52 Lodestar Multiplier In Consumer Class Action

Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Substantiation of Reasonableness of Fees

Third District Sustains Substantial Fee Award in Unpublished Decision.      Who says that class action attorneys are greedy? No matter what your bent, the next case is a refreshing example of how substantial fees are justified in a class action settlement generating substantial recovery for class members.

Fee-Splitting Agreement Not Disclosed To Court In Class Action Fairness Proceedings Precluded Later Suit To Enforce The Agreement

Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Referral Agreements

California Rule of Court 3.769(b) Compels Heightened Disclosure and Scrutiny in Class Action Contexts.             In our July 28, 2008 post, we discussed Manley v. Burunsuzyan, an unpublished decision that reinforced the need for client consent to a fee-splitting arrangement between counsel pursuant to Rules of Professional Conduct, rule 2-200(A).  Aside from

Scroll to Top