14 Cited authorities

Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp.
150 F.3d 1011 (9th Cir. 1998) Cited 3,066 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"
Jones v. GN Netcom, Inc.
654 F.3d 935 (9th Cir. 2011) Cited 1,469 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that district courts should "award only that amount of fees that is reasonable in relation to the results obtained," even where counting all hours reasonably spent would produce a larger fees award
Churchill Village v. General Electric
361 F.3d 566 (9th Cir. 2004) Cited 746 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that approval of a settlement that received 45 objections and 500 opt-outs out of 90,000 class members was proper
Resnick v. Frank
779 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2015) Cited 460 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that awards cumulatively representing 0.17% of the settlement fund were reasonable
Redman v. Radioshack Corp.
768 F.3d 622 (7th Cir. 2014) Cited 155 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that class counsel's filing of an attorneys’-fee motion "after the deadline set by the court for objections to the settlement had expired" violated Rule 23(h) and stating that "[t]here was no excuse for permitting so irregular, indeed unlawful, a procedure"
Synfuel Techs., Inc. v. DHL Express (USA), Inc.
463 F.3d 646 (7th Cir. 2006) Cited 177 times 2 Legal Analyses
Finding a settlement inadequate because the vouchers "share some characteristics of coupons, including forced future business with the defendant and . . . the likelihood that the full amount of [Defendant's] gains will not be disgorged."
True v. American Honda Motor Co.
749 F. Supp. 2d 1052 (C.D. Cal. 2010) Cited 95 times
Finding that "discovery ha[d] been sufficient to permit the parties to enter into a well-informed settlement, and this factor weighs in favor of approval"
Pearson v. NBTY, Inc.
772 F.3d 778 (7th Cir. 2014) Cited 76 times 9 Legal Analyses
Concluding that the claims process of a consumer class action settlement appeared to have been designed "with an eye toward discouraging the filing of claims"
Pelletz v. Weyerhaeuser Co.
255 F.R.D. 537 (W.D. Wash. 2009) Cited 14 times
Approving incentive awards of $7500 each to the four class representatives of a class of between 110,000 and 140,000 members in an settlement for an unspecified amount and in which attorneys' fees were capped at $1.75 million
Moody v. Sears Roebuck and Co.
664 S.E.2d 569 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008) Cited 7 times 1 Legal Analyses
Suggesting that a limited review approach is consistent with relevant Supreme Court case law
Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers
Fed. R. Civ. P. 5 Cited 22,233 times 16 Legal Analyses
Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system
Section 1712 - Coupon settlements
28 U.S.C. § 1712 Cited 146 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"

Lee v. Enterprise Leasing Company-West, LLC

14 Cited authorities

Holding that district courts should "award only that amount of fees that is reasonable in relation to the results obtained," even where counting all hours reasonably spent would produce a larger fees award

Holding that approval of a settlement that received 45 objections and 500 opt-outs out of 90,000 class members was proper

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

Holding that class counsel's filing of an attorneys’-fee motion "after the deadline set by the court for objections to the settlement had expired" violated Rule 23(h) and stating that "[t]here was no excuse for permitting so irregular, indeed unlawful, a procedure"

Finding a settlement inadequate because the vouchers "share some characteristics of coupons, including forced future business with the defendant and . . . the likelihood that the full amount of [Defendant's] gains will not be disgorged."

Finding that "discovery ha[d] been sufficient to permit the parties to enter into a well-informed settlement, and this factor weighs in favor of approval"

Concluding that the claims process of a consumer class action settlement appeared to have been designed "with an eye toward discouraging the filing of claims"

Approving incentive awards of $7500 each to the four class representatives of a class of between 110,000 and 140,000 members in an settlement for an unspecified amount and in which attorneys' fees were capped at $1.75 million

Suggesting that a limited review approach is consistent with relevant Supreme Court case law

Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system

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"