Briggs v. United States of America et al

Filing 241

SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER RE PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR ADDITIONAL ATTORNEY'S FEES AND/OR CY PRES DISTRIBUTION AND DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR CY PRES DISTRIBUTION [re 240 MOTION to Amend/Correct 239 Order on Motion for Hearing,, Order on Motion to Amend/Correct, filed by Julius Briggs]. Signed by Judge William Alsup on 3/6/2012. (whasec, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 3/6/2012)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9 10 11 JULIUS BRIGGS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, 12 Plaintiff, 13 14 15 No. C 07-05760 WHA SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER RE PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ADDITIONAL ATTORNEY’S FEES AND/OR CY PRES DISTRIBUTION AND DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR CY PRES DISTRIBUTION v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. / 16 17 On February 14, 2012, an order issued denying plaintiff’s motion for additional 18 attorney’s fees and/or cy pres distribution and granting defendant’s motion for cy pres 19 distribution. That order directed, among other things, that the class administrator (“KCC”) 20 promptly transfer all funds constituting class fund residue to cy pres recipient AAFES 21 (Dkt. No. 237 at 8). That order was amended on February 23 (Dkt. No. 239). 22 Class counsel now advises the Court of a discrepancy in the accounting provided. 23 KCC overstated the amount of uncashed check funds as $131,844.80 (Dkt. No. 235). 24 The present value of uncashed check funds is, instead, $54,487.27. The latest stale date 25 for uncashed checks is March 18, 2012. The balance of $77,357.53 reflects the amount 26 due to 96 identified class members who, as it turns out, have not yet received checks at all. 27 Additionally, two class members have come forward since the order dated February 14. 28 These two members are owed refunds in the amount of $2,680.06 (Br. 2; Vishner Decl. ¶¶ 3–5). 1 In light of these unfortunate developments, class counsel moves to amend the February 2 14 order, as amended on February 23, to allow KCC to distribute funds to the identified class 3 members before transferring class fund residue to AAFES. Class counsel also seeks a partial fee 4 distribution of $70,000, reflecting half of the outstanding fees, minus interest. No early 5 distribution of attorney’s fees shall be made. Because the Court agrees with the KCC part, 6 the order dated February 14 as amended (Dkt. Nos. 237, 239) is hereby amended yet again as 7 follows: 8 9 10 1. KCC, as soon as practicable, issue refund checks to the 98 persons listed in Exhibit A of the Vishner Declaration (Dkt. No. 240-1, Exh. A); 2. KCC cease re-issuance of distribution checks, other than the 11 98 checks listed above in (1), and maintain custody of all funds constituting class 12 fund residue and uncashed check funds; 13 3. KCC, within five business days of the last stale date of all 14 uncashed checks, including those checks issued pursuant to this order, transfer all 15 funds constituting class fund residue and uncashed check funds to the AAFES; 16 KCC shall further provide AAFES with the identities of all class members whose 17 checks were not cashed; 18 4. Upon transfer of the funds listed above in (3), KCC transfer 19 $140,000 in awarded attorney’s fees and interest accrued on awarded fees 20 according to the direction of class counsel. 21 Upon completion of the above, KCC shall provide the Court with an accounting of all 22 transfers made from the class fund and file a termination report. 23 The additional delay required to hold funds awaiting clearance of all checks should be 24 cost-free to the fund. This snafu is the making of either KCC or class counsel. Accordingly, 25 26 27 28 2 1 either KCC or class counsel should absorb this cost. The two should let the court know how 2 this cost will be addressed by NOON ON MARCH 12, 2012. 3 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5 6 Dated: March 6, 2012. WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?