14 Cited authorities

Martinez v. Ylst
951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991) Cited 31,029 times
Holding that failure to file a timely objection may waive the right to appeal the district court's order
Eisen v. Carlisle Jacquelin
417 U.S. 156 (1974) Cited 3,762 times 22 Legal Analyses
Holding that individual notice to class members identifiable through reasonable efforts is mandatory in (b) actions
Tulsa Professional Collection Services v. Pope
485 U.S. 478 (1988) Cited 856 times
Holding "the Due Process Clause requires that [a known creditor] be given notice by mail or other means as certain to ensure actual notice"
Resnick v. Frank
779 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2015) Cited 452 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that awards cumulatively representing 0.17% of the settlement fund were reasonable
Lane v. Facebook, Inc.
696 F.3d 811 (9th Cir. 2012) Cited 409 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that Rule 23(e) "does not require detailed analysis of the statutes or causes of action forming the basis for the plaintiff class' claims, and it does not require an estimate of the potential value of those claims"
Torrisi v. Tucson Elec. Power Co.
8 F.3d 1370 (9th Cir. 1993) Cited 386 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that we review adequacy de novo
Vasquez v. Coast Valley Roofing, Inc.
670 F. Supp. 2d 1114 (E.D. Cal. 2009) Cited 79 times
Finding no conflict where all members had an interest in "obtaining payment for wages unlawfully withheld"
In re Currency Conversion Fee Antitrust Litigation
263 F.R.D. 110 (S.D.N.Y. 2009) Cited 43 times
Finding that incentive awards of $45,000, $35,000, and lesser amounts were "within the range of what other courts have found to be reasonable, although on the higher end"
In re Black Farmers Discrimination Litig.
856 F. Supp. 2d 1 (D.D.C. 2011) Cited 37 times 2 Legal Analyses
Explaining Pigford consent decree settlement procedures
Murillo v. Pacific Gas Electric Company
NO. CIV. 2:08-1974 WBS GGH (E.D. Cal. Jul. 20, 2010) Cited 35 times
Finding rate of $95 per hour for paralegals and $300 for attorneys in wage and hour action appropriate
Rule 23 - Class Actions
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 Cited 34,931 times 1234 Legal Analyses
Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"

Dana Bostick v. Herbalife International of America Inc et al

14 Cited authorities

Holding that failure to file a timely objection may waive the right to appeal the district court's order

Holding that individual notice to class members identifiable through reasonable efforts is mandatory in (b) actions

Holding "the Due Process Clause requires that [a known creditor] be given notice by mail or other means as certain to ensure actual notice"

Holding that awards cumulatively representing 0.17% of the settlement fund were reasonable

Holding that Rule 23(e) "does not require detailed analysis of the statutes or causes of action forming the basis for the plaintiff class' claims, and it does not require an estimate of the potential value of those claims"

Holding that we review adequacy de novo

Finding no conflict where all members had an interest in "obtaining payment for wages unlawfully withheld"

Finding that incentive awards of $45,000, $35,000, and lesser amounts were "within the range of what other courts have found to be reasonable, although on the higher end"

Explaining Pigford consent decree settlement procedures

Finding rate of $95 per hour for paralegals and $300 for attorneys in wage and hour action appropriate

Holding that, to certify a class, the court must find that "questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over any questions affecting only individual members"