Cases: Multipliers

Class Actions/In The News: New York District Judge Approves $544.8 Million Fee Award In Visa/MasterCard Antitrust Merchant Class Action

Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers, In The News

  Court Utilizes “Sliding Scale” Percentage of Fund Approach, Checked by Lodestar With Multiplier. The Price?  Priceless.      After approving a settlement producing a $5.7 billion settlement fund in a class action case brought by merchants against Visa, MasterCard, and several banks relating to certain interchange rates, U.S. District Judge John Gleeson then had to […]

Civil Rights/Multiplier: $680,520 Fee Award Under FEHA Affirmed On Appeal Even Though Winning Civil Rights Plaintiff Only Won $150,000 In Damages

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Multipliers

  No Statement of Decision Required, and Not Requested—No Fee Award Error.      This one has quite a lot of permutations for everyone to consider. On the merits, in a first impression case, the appellate held that a defective special verdict is reviewed under a harmless error analysis. However, it also has some nice themes

Civil Rights/Multiplier: FEHA Plaintiff Winning $470,000 Compensatory Damages Properly Awarded Prevailing Party Fees Of $431,884.25

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Multipliers

  1.33 Multiplier Was Justified.      Plaintiff in Pena v. Central Freight Lines, Case Nos. A134753/A138014 (1st Dist., Div. 3 Oct. 4, 2013) (unpublished) won $470,000 in economic/noneconomic damages after a bench trial, with the lower court subsequently awarding $431,884.25 in fees under the FEHA fee-shifting statute–including a 1.33 multiplier, despite plaintiff requesting fees of

Class Actions/Costs/Multiplier/Reasonableness Of Fees: Plaintiffs Winning Vacation Pay Labor Code Class Action Also Garner Costs Of $145,341.93 And Attorney’s Fees Of $5,722,008

Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Costs, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Reasonableness of Fees

  2.0 Multiplier Enhancement Was Justified.      In Molina v. Lexmark International, Inc., Case Nos. B227746 et al. (2d Dist., Div. 2 Sept. 19, 2013) (unpublished), an employer suffered a $7,777,620 adverse amended judgment in a class action involving employer’s vacation policy violations of Labor Code section 227.3. The lower court also awarded plaintiffs $145,341.93

Costs/Lodestar/Multiplier/Section 998: $989,258 Plaintiff Fee Award Affirmed Under Bane Act

Cases: Costs, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Section 998

  Additional Costs Awards for Experts and Trial Technology Also Sustained.      In Bender v. County of Los Angeles, Case No. B236294 (2d Dist., Div. 8 July 9, 2013) (published), plaintiff won an excessive police force Bane Act suit, with the Bane Act containing a fee-shifting clause. The lower court also awarded $989,258 to plaintiff

Civil Rights/Lodestar/Multiplier: Lower Court Correctly Awarded $165,781 Fee Lodestar Rather Than Requested $2.169 Million

Cases: Civil Rights, Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers

  Multipliers Also Correctly Denied.      After a decades long FEHA litigation involving multiple appeals and four litigation phases, partially winning plaintiff in Fotheringham v. Avery Dennison Corp., Case No. B238282 (2d Dist., Div. 7 Feb. 13, 2013) (unpublished) must have felt dismayed when the lower court awarded her only $165,781 in fees (out of

Lodestar/Multiplier/Private Attorney General/Substantiation Of Reasonableness Of Fees: Catalyst Theory Fee Recovery Against Gambling Control Commission Affirmed, But Strikes Multiplier For “Fees On Fees” Work On Amount Of Fees

Cases: Lodestar, Cases: Multipliers, Cases: Private Attorney General (CCP 1021.5)

  Reconstructed Time Sheet Evidence Went Only to Weight, Not Admissibility Of Fee Submissions.      In Cates v. John Chiang, as State Controller, Case No. D060570 (4th Dist., Div. 1 Feb. 7, 2013) (published), plaintiff received $2,011,844 in fees under a private attorney general “catalyst theory” (lodestar at a blended hourly rate of $451 for

Multipliers/Interest On Fee Awards: Khazan III Comes Down, Affirming Trial Court Award Of Lodestar And Multiplier

Cases: Interest, Cases: Multipliers

  Appellate Court Dismisses Applying Perdue in California State Court Cases and Affirms that Interest Ran From Date of Remanded New Fee Determination.      In our March 31, 2009 post, we extensively discussed Khazan v. Braynin (Khazan II), an unpublished appellate court decision where the First District, Division 4 remanded a fee award because it

In The News . . . . District Judge Awards Wage/Hour Class Counsel 25% Percentage Of Recovery As Attorney’s Fees

Cases: Class Actions, Cases: Multipliers, In The News

  Award Represented a 3.2 Multiplier.      In McKenzie v. Federal Express Corporation, U.S.D.C., C.D. Cal. Case No. CV 10-02420 GAF (PLAx) (Doc. No. 139 July 2, 2012), U.S. District Judge Gary Allen Feess (appropriate last name for this post) awarded plaintiffs’ class counsel $2,062,500 in attorney’s fees in a California Labor Code wage/hour case,

Scroll to Top