44 Cited authorities

Hensley v. Eckerhart
461 U.S. 424 (1983) Cited 21,524 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding a civil-rights plaintiff can recover attorney's fees for claims that "involve a common core of facts or will be based on related legal theories," even if only one of those claims arises under a fee-shifting statute
Blum v. Stenson
465 U.S. 886 (1984) Cited 8,800 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that fee shifting is “to be calculated according to the prevailing market rates in the relevant community, regardless of whether plaintiff is represented by private or nonprofit counsel”
Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp.
150 F.3d 1011 (9th Cir. 1998) Cited 3,047 times 16 Legal Analyses
Holding that " common nucleus of facts and potential legal remedies dominate[d]" over "idiosyncratic differences between state consumer protection laws" where a nationwide class of minivan buyers’ claims turned on "questions of [the manufacturer’s] prior knowledge of the [vehicle’s] deficiency, the design defect, and a damages remedy"
Staton v. Boeing Co.
327 F.3d 938 (9th Cir. 2003) Cited 1,920 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that "named plaintiffs ... are eligible for reasonable incentive payments" in addition to reimbursement "for their substantiated litigation expenses, and identifiable services rendered to the class directly under the supervision of class counsel"
Boeing Co. v. Van Gemert
444 U.S. 472 (1980) Cited 1,027 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
Rodriguez v. W. Publ'g Corp.
563 F.3d 948 (9th Cir. 2009) Cited 1,054 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that settlement was substantively fair and reasonable to the class
Gates v. Deukmejian
987 F.2d 1392 (9th Cir. 1992) Cited 1,678 times
Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by applying exception to the forum rule where local counsel were unavailable
Vizcaino v. Microsoft Corp.
290 F.3d 1043 (9th Cir. 2002) Cited 1,070 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding state law governing underlying claims in a diversity action “also governs the award of fees”
In re Gen. Motors Corp. Pick-Up Truck Fuel Tank
55 F.3d 768 (3d Cir. 1995) Cited 1,135 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that nothing in Rule 23 "can be read to authorize separate, liberalized criteria for settlement classes"
Dunleavy v. Nadler
213 F.3d 454 (9th Cir. 2000) Cited 862 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding an incentive award to the class representatives
Section 17200 - Unfair competition defined
Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 17200 Cited 17,798 times 315 Legal Analyses
Prohibiting unlawful business practices

In Re:

44 Cited authorities

Holding a civil-rights plaintiff can recover attorney's fees for claims that "involve a common core of facts or will be based on related legal theories," even if only one of those claims arises under a fee-shifting statute

Holding that fee shifting is “to be calculated according to the prevailing market rates in the relevant community, regardless of whether plaintiff is represented by private or nonprofit counsel”

Holding that "named plaintiffs ... are eligible for reasonable incentive payments" in addition to reimbursement "for their substantiated litigation expenses, and identifiable services rendered to the class directly under the supervision of class counsel"

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

Holding that settlement was substantively fair and reasonable to the class

Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by applying exception to the forum rule where local counsel were unavailable

Holding state law governing underlying claims in a diversity action “also governs the award of fees”

Holding that nothing in Rule 23 "can be read to authorize separate, liberalized criteria for settlement classes"

Holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in awarding an incentive award to the class representatives

Prohibiting unlawful business practices