Summary
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California directs the parties in a proposed class action and PAGA settlement to submit supplemental briefing and documentation. The court seeks more precise valuation of the asserted claims and justification for a requested attorneys’ fee award of up to 35% of the settlement fund, above the Ninth Circuit’s 25% benchmark.
Holdings
- The parties' motion did not provide sufficiently precise estimates of the potential recovery on each core claim and the PAGA claims to permit the court to evaluate the substantive fairness of the proposed settlement; supplemental valuation briefing and documentation were required.
- A request for attorneys' fees exceeding the Ninth Circuit's 25 percent percentage-of-the-fund benchmark requires a case-specific explanation, and the motion's conclusory assertions did not adequately justify the requested award of up to 35 percent of the settlement fund.
Questions Presented
- Whether the parties provided sufficient valuation information for the court to evaluate the substantive fairness of the proposed class and PAGA settlement.
- Whether the requested attorneys' fee award of up to 35 percent of the settlement fund was adequately justified under the circumstances and in light of the results obtained.
Disposition
other
Cases Cited (3)
- In re Tableware Antitrust Litig., 484 F. Supp. 2d 1078, 1080 (N.D. Cal. 2007)(followed)
- Norton v. Strategic Staffing Sols., L.C., No. 3:23-cv-06648-JSC, 2025 WL 1666143, at *8 (N.D. Cal. June 12, 2025)(followed)
- Powers v. Eichen, 229 F.3d 1249, 1256-57 (9th Cir. 2000)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…