In Re: Western States Wholesale Natural Gas Antitrust Litigation (MDL 1566)
ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEYS' FEES, REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES, AND INCENTIVE AWARDS re ECF No. 2895 Proposed Order. Signed by Judge Robert C. Jones on 6/5/2017. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
IN RE: WESTERN STATES
WHOLESALE NATURAL GAS
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
Arandell Corporation., et al.
v. Xcel Energy Inc., et al.
Heartland Regional Medical Center, et al.
v. ONEOK, Inc., et al.
Learjet, et al. v. ONEOK, et al.
NewPage Wisconsin System, Inc., et al.
v. CMS Energy Resource Management
Company, et al.
MDL DOCKET NO. 1566
Base Case File No.
[PROPOSED] ORDER AWARDING ATTORNEYS’ FEES,
REIMBURSEMENT OF EXPENSES, AND INCENTIVE AWARDS
The Court, having considered Plaintiffs’ Motion for an Award of Attorneys’ Fees,
Reimbursement of Expenses, and Incentive Awards and supporting papers (the “Motion”), and
the complete record and files in the above-referenced matters; and good cause appearing, hereby
The Motion requests (1) reimbursement of 50% of counsel’s out-of-pocket
litigation costs and expenses; (2) an award of attorneys’ fees of 32.8% of the Settlement Fund
(comprised of the Settling Defendants’ settlement payments of $42,800,000); (3) and incentive
awards to each of the named plaintiffs appointed as class representatives for settlement purposes
(“Settlement Class Representatives”).
The Court finds that the amount of fees requested is fair and reasonable under the
The attorneys’ fees requested were entirely contingent upon success. Plaintiffs’
Counsel1 risked time and effort and advanced costs and expenses with no ultimate guarantee of
The Class Notice, sent to 3,626 prospective Settlement Class Members, and the
Publication Notice, informed potential Settlement Class Members that Plaintiffs’ counsel would
be seeking fees in the amount of 32.8% of the Settlement Fund, reimbursement of costs and
expenses, and incentive awards for the named plaintiffs in the actions listed on this Order. The
Court has been informed that no objections were received from the Settlement Class to the
interim fee request, reimbursement of expenses, and payment of incentive awards.
The Court has considered the Motion and papers filed in support thereof. Based
upon these and other matters on record filed in this action, the Court finds that the fee requested
is reasonable and proper, and that the costs and expenses incurred by Plaintiffs’ counsel were
necessary, reasonable, and proper.
The Court finds that reimbursements of $840,873.93 in Learjet, $766,813.50 in
Heartland, and $1,053,919.10 in Arandell and NewPage, which represent 50% of the expenses
incurred by counsel through August 31, 2016 are fair, reasonable, and proper.
The Court finds that an attorney-fee award of 32.8% of the Settlement Fund to
Plaintiffs’ Counsel is fair, reasonable, and proper.
Plaintiffs’ Counsel refers to Polsinelli PC, McCallister Law Group, Freiden Unrein, &
Forbes LLP, and Barry Law Office in Learjet; to Polsinelli PC and Barry Law Office in
Heartland; and to Polsinelli PC, Kohner Mann & Kailas S.C., and Barry Law Office in Arandell
The Court further finds that distributing incentive awards as detailed below to
each of the Settlement Class Representatives is fair, reasonable, and proper.
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
The $42,800,000 in settlements (the “Settlement Fund”) shall be allocated among
the Kansas, Missouri, and Wisconsin classes as follows: 32.92% to the Kansas Class, 19.13% to
the Missouri Class, and 47.95% to the Wisconsin Class. Applying these percentages, the Kansas
Class shall receive $14,089,760 before accounting for expenses, fees, and incentive awards, the
Missouri Class shall receive $8,187,640 and the Wisconsin Class shall receive $20,522,000 from
the Settlement Fund.
Plaintiffs’ Counsel shall be reimbursed for expenses in the amounts of
$840,873.93 in Learjet, $766,813.50 in Heartland, and $1,053,919.10 in Arandell and NewPage.
Plaintiffs’ Counsel are awarded attorneys’ fees in the amount of 32.8% of the
$42,800,000 Settlement Fund.
Class Counsel for Learjet shall be awarded $4,637,110 in fees from the
Settlement Fund, Class Counsel for Heartland shall be awarded $2,597,289 from the Settlement
Fund, and Class Counsel for Arandell and NewPage shall be awarded $6,814,038. The award of
attorneys’ fees shall be allocated among the law firms representing Plaintiffs by agreement
among plaintiffs’ counsel.
The attorneys’ fees awarded and the amount in reimbursement of litigation costs
and expenses shall be paid form the Settlement Fund.
Plaintiffs’ Counsel are authorized to and shall pay, or direct payment of, to the
following twelve Settlement Class Representatives:
In Learjet: (a) Learjet, Inc., $25,000; and (b) for Topeka Unified School
District 501, $25,000;
In Heartland: (a) For Heartland Regional Medical Center, $25,000; (b) for
Northwest Missouri State University, $25,000; and (c) for Prime Tanning
In Arandell: (a) For Arandell Corporation, $75,000; (b) for ATI Ladish
LLC f/k/a Ladish Company, Inc., $75,000; (c) for Briggs & Stratton
Corporation, $75,000; (d) for Carthage College, $75,000; (e) for
Merrick’s, Inc., $75,000; and (f) for Sargento Foods Inc., $75,000; and
In NewPage: For NewPage Wisconsin System, Inc., $75,000.
These incentive awards shall be drawn from the funds allocated to each respective settlement
class after reimbursement of expenses and payment of attorney fees, as detailed above.
The Court retains jurisdiction over the matters that are the subject of this Order
until after full disbursement of the Settlement Fund, and/or as necessary to effectuate the terms
of the Settlement Agreements relating to attorneys’ fees and incentive awards.
This Order shall be entered pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, as the Court finds that there is no just reason for delay.
5th day of June, 2017.
IT IS SO ORDERED this ___ day of ______________, 2017.
Judge Robert C. Jones
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?