§Why CasetextPricing

Dewey et al v. Volkswagen of America, Inc. et al

MEMORANDUM in Opposition re MOTION for Attorney Fees

28 Cited authorities

  1. Boeing Co. v. Van Gemert

    444 U.S. 472 (1980)   Cited 1,025 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court properly assessed attorney's fees based on the total fund available to the prevailing class rather than the amount actually recovered

  2. In re Prudential Insurance Company

    148 F.3d 283 (3d Cir. 1998)   Cited 1,362 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding the district court acted well within its discretion in denying an objector's request for discovery where the objector was able to present his arguments to the court during the fairness hearing and where the court found the objector "had ample opportunity to avail himself of the substantial discovery provided to Lead Counsel but failed to do so, and that additional discovery was unnecessary because [the objector] focused primarily on legal issues"

  3. In re Gen. Motors Corp. Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank

    55 F.3d 768 (3d Cir. 1995)   Cited 1,134 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that nothing in Rule 23 "can be read to authorize separate, liberalized criteria for settlement classes"

  4. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Visa U.S.A., Inc.

    396 F.3d 96 (2d Cir. 2005)   Cited 754 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that decision to grant or reject objector's motion for discovery regarding fairness of settlement depended on "whether or not the District Court had before it sufficient facts intelligently to approve the settlement offer"

  5. Goldberger v. Integrated Resources, Inc.

    209 F.3d 43 (2d Cir. 2000)   Cited 863 times
    Holding that risk must be measured at the time the lawsuit is filed

  6. In re Cendant Corp. Litigation

    264 F.3d 201 (3d Cir. 2001)   Cited 709 times
    Holding that the PSLRA is clear that "the power to `select and retain' lead counsel belongs . . . to the lead plaintiff, and the court's role is confined to deciding whether to `approve' that choice" and that should the court disagree with the lead plaintiffs choice "it should clearly state why . . . and should direct the lead plaintiff to undertake an acceptable selection process"

  7. In re Rite Aid Corp. Securities Litigation

    396 F.3d 294 (3d Cir. 2005)   Cited 433 times
    Holding that district court did not abuse its discretion in finding the absence of substantial objections by class members weighed in favor of approval

  8. Gunter v. Ridgewood Energy Corp.

    223 F.3d 190 (3d Cir. 2000)   Cited 393 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding risk of non-payment to be high when "the defendants were close to insolvency"

  9. In re Cendant Corp. Prides Litigation

    243 F.3d 722 (3d Cir. 2001)   Cited 263 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding an abuse of discretion can occur "if the judge fails to apply the proper legal standard or to follow proper procedures in making the determination, or bases an award upon findings of fact that are clearly erroneous"

  10. Weinberger v. Great Northern Nekoosa Corp.

    925 F.2d 518 (1st Cir. 1991)   Cited 265 times
    Holding that courts should “scrutinize” fees requested pursuant to clear-sailing agreements to see whether they “are fair and reasonable”

  11. Rule 23 - Class Actions

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 23   Cited 34,802 times   1232 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"

  12. Section 1712 - Coupon settlements

    28 U.S.C. § 1712   Cited 142 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Providing that "the portion of any attorney's fee award to class counsel that is attributable to the award of the coupons shall be based on the value to class members of the coupons that are redeemed"