Ninth Circuit Vacates Class-Settlement Fee Award Under Rule 23(h), Rejecting Lodestar-With-Multiplier Calculation in Case Where 96% of Value Is Coupons

In Chambers v. Whirlpool Corp., No. 16-56666 (9th Cir. Nov. 10, 2020), a Ninth Circuit panel affirms a class settlement, but remands the case for a recalculation of the attorney’s fees under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(h). The panel finds that awarding the lawyers’ billable hours with a 1.69 multiplier – totaling $14.8 million –Continue reading “Ninth Circuit Vacates Class-Settlement Fee Award Under Rule 23(h), Rejecting Lodestar-With-Multiplier Calculation in Case Where 96% of Value Is Coupons”

Plaintiff Had Standing to Represent Customers Who Paid Automatic Gratuities at All 49 Hotel Locations in Florida, Holds Eleventh Circuit

In Fox v. The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, LLC, No. 19-10361 (11th Cir. Sept. 29, 2020), the Eleventh Circuit reverses dismissal of a putative class action, holding that the class representative – who ate at three Ritz-Carlton restaurants, and alleged violations of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act – could bring a claim onContinue reading “Plaintiff Had Standing to Represent Customers Who Paid Automatic Gratuities at All 49 Hotel Locations in Florida, Holds Eleventh Circuit”

Sixth Circuit Dashes the Concept of a Rule 23 “Negotiating” Class

In In re Nat’l Prescription Opiate Litig., No. 19-4097 (6th Cir. Sept. 24, 2020), a divided panel of the Sixth Circuit rebuffs a novel attempt to certify a Rule 23 class in a massive multi-district litigation (MDL) proceeding, solely for the purpose of giving the parties a vehicle for negotiating a global resolution. “The nationalContinue reading “Sixth Circuit Dashes the Concept of a Rule 23 “Negotiating” Class”

Eleventh Circuit Flatly Bans Incentive Payments to Rule 23 Class Representatives in Settlements

In a startling opinion, Johnson v. NPAS Solutions, LLC, No. 18-12344 (11th Cir. Sept. 17, 2020), a 2-1 panel announces that incentive payments of any kind to Rule 23 class representatives are incompatible with common-fund principles and are therefore banned. The panel vacates a $6000 incentive payment in a Telephone Consumer Protection Act class settlement.Continue reading “Eleventh Circuit Flatly Bans Incentive Payments to Rule 23 Class Representatives in Settlements”