SKEEN et al v. BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC et al

Filing 48

OPINION AND ORDER granting 40 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Judge William H. Walls on 4/29/14. (sr, )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
:
JOSHUA SKEEN and LAURIE FREEMAN, on
behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,

: OPINION AND ORDER
:
:

Civ. No. 2:13-cv-1531-WHW-CLW

:

v.

:
BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company; BMW
(U.S.) HOLDING CORP., a Delaware
corporation; and BAYERISCHE MOTORENWERK
AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT, a foreign corporation,

:
:
:
:
:

Defendants.
PATRICIA CURRAN, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated,

:
:
: Civ. No. 2:13-cv-4625-WHW-CLW

Plaintiffs,

:
:

v.
BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company; BMW
(U.S.) HOLDING CORP., a Delaware
corporation; and BAYERISCHE MOTORENWERK
AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT, a foreign corporation,
Defendants.

:
:
:
:
:
:

Walls, Senior District Judge
On February 18, 2014, Plaintiffs moved for the appointment of the firms Khorrami
Boucher Sumner Sanguinetti, LLP, Cafferty Clobes Meriwether & Sprengel LLP, and Markun
Zusman Freniere Compton LLP as Interim Co-Lead Class Counsel, with Pinilis Halpern, LLP as

1

NOT FOR PUBLICATION
Interim Liaison Counsel. All counsel appeared before the court on April 29, 2014, in the
presence of defense counsel, to discuss their qualifications.
“[T]he determination of whether class counsel is adequate . . . is committed to a district
court’s sound discretion.” In re Cmty. Bank of N. Virginia, 622 F.3d 275, 308 (3d Cir. 2010).
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g)(1) lays out the factors a court should consider in that analysis:
“(i) the work counsel has done in identifying or investigating
potential claims in the action; (ii) counsel’s experience in handling
class actions, other complex litigation, and the types of claims
asserted in the action; (iii) counsel’s knowledge of the applicable
law; and (iv) the resources counsel will commit to representing the
class.”
Before a class is certified, a court “may designate interim counsel to act on behalf of a putative
class.” Fed. R. of Civ. P. 23(g)(3). Though the Third Circuit has not opined on what
considerations should affect an appointment of interim class counsel, other courts in this district
have found it appropriate to apply the same Rule 23(g)(1)(A) factors a court would consider
when appointing lead counsel after certification. See Durso v. Samsung Elecs. Am., Do. 12-cv5352 (DMC), 2013 WL 4084640, at *3 (D.N.J. Aug. 5, 2013) (citing Waudby v. Verizon
Wireless Servs., LLC, 248 F.R.D. 173, 177 (D.N.J. 2008)).
Plaintiffs’ motion and attorneys’ appearances have convinced the Court that these firms
satisfy the Rule 23(g) factors. The motion is granted.

April 29, 2014
/s/ William H. Walls
United States Senior District Judge

2