Re-Do Was The Result In This One. Above: Lockheed Model 18 Lodestar. Source: www.airwaysmuseum.com In Seltzer v. R.W. Selby & Company, Inc., Case No. B270168 (2d Dist., Div. 2 May 3, 2017) (unpublished), a trial judge in a class action case awarded $29,409 in attorney’s fees to class counsel under […]
Also, Costs Improperly Excluded From Fee Calculus As Permitted Under § 1983. The Third District in Clapp v. Terry, Case No. C076562 (3d Dist. Nov. 23, 2016) (unpublished) is an important primer on the proper methodology to be used when awarding lodestar fees, fees on fees, and costs in civil right cases to
Majority Found Appeal Notice Encompassed Fee Award, But Dissent Did Not Agree And Found Plaintiffs Did Not Provide Hourly Rate Evidence In The Right Time Period And For FOIA Cases. Hiken v. Department of Defense, No. 13-17073 (9th Cir. Sept. 6, 2016) (published) is a situation where magistrates, district judges, and the Ninth
Fee Award of $59,334.60 Out Of Requested $308,425 Was Too Drastic Based On Using Improper Fee Reduction Methodology. Haircut. Marion Post Wolcott, photographer. Sept. 1938. Library of Congress. In the last few months, we posted on some fees cases—most notably Kerkeles (see our December 20, 2015 post)—where appellate courts have reversed decisions
Plaintiff Requested $212,287.50 (Inclusive Of A 1.5 Multiplier), But Lower Court’s Award Of A Reasonable Lodestar Was No Abuse of Discretion. Plaintiff employee eventually obtained recovery of $43,654.50 in an unpaid commission dispute even though he at one point was willing to accept $75,000 to settle which included a $30,000 component to reimburse
Lodestar Was The Methodology In Statutory Fee-Shifting Matter. Chief Judge Ruben Castillo of the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, has provided a nice discussion and clues of what to include in a lodestar request in an attorney’s fees motion in a class action arising under a fee-shifting statute, namely, the Magnuson-Moss
Court of Appeal Applies Ninth Circuit’s Gates And Moreno Decisions. Getting a haircut. Camp Shelby. 1941. William Perlitch, photographer. Library of Congress. Kerkeles v. City of San Jose, Case No. H040915 (6th Dist. Dec. 18, 2015) (published) is a significant 2015 end-of-the year decision, where an appellate court adopted the Ninth Circuit’s
High Percentage Of Common Fund That Is Much Lower Than Lodestar Is Reasonable Way To Calculate Fee Award In Class Action. A fee award to plaintiffs’ attorneys of 37.5% of the settlement fund may seem generous. Indeed, it seemed too generous to objectors in Roos v. Honeywell International and Rogers, A142156 (1/1 Nov.
Award Was Less Than Half Of $81 Million Request, Using Lodestar Billings Augmented By Positive 2.2 Multiplier. On September 2, 2015, U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh of the Northern District of California gave final approval to a class action settlement by high tech workers challenging on antitrust grounds a “no poaching” pact reached
Deals With Multiple Issues After Lower Court Awarded Only $19,176 Out Of Requested $231,000 In Fees. In our March 19, 2015 post, we discussed the unpublished decision of Save Our Uniquely Rural v. County of San Bernardino, Case No. E059521 (4th Dist., Div. 2 Mar. 18, 2015). We now can update: the decision
