Lodestar Was The Methodology In Statutory Fee-Shifting Matter.
Chief Judge Ruben Castillo of the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Illinois, has provided a nice discussion and clues of what to include in a lodestar request in an attorney’s fees motion in a class action arising under a fee-shifting statute, namely, the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act (MMWA), 15 U.S.C. § 2301.
In Reid v. Unilever United States, Inc, No. 1:2012cv06058 (Doc. 213 June 10, 2015), a class action settled for $10.25 million arising out of consumer warranty allegations that a smoothing kit caused hair to melt and fall out. Class counsel then moved to recover $3.4 million in attorney’s fees, arguing for a common fund rather than lodestar analysis. Chief Judge Castillo found that the lodestar was the appropriate measure in a federal fee-shifting statute case. The defense argued fees should be no more than $1.1 million. The district court eventually awarded $1.5 million in fees to class counsel.
In doing so, the district court made reductions for these factors: (1) inadequate fee documentation—vague entries and severely redacted entries; (2) attorney time communicating with the media; and (3) clerical tasks performed by attorneys. However, Chief Judge Castillo did not discount for assignment of tasks to multiple attorneys given the complexity of the case.
Also, in setting reasonable hourly rates, the district court credited the U.S. Consumer Attorney Fee Survey, while not giving credence to the Adjusted (“unofficial”) Laffey Matrix.
Here is a link to the fees/costs order in the case.
Comments