Pecou v. Bessemer Trust Company et al
Filing
82
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS, ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES, AND CASE CONTRIBUTION AWARDS granting 69 Motion for Attorney Fees. It is hereby ORDERED as follows: 1. Class Counsels request for an award of 6;1,666,666.67 in attorneys' fees and expenses approved. Having reviewed Class Counsel's application and the applicable legal authorities, the Court finds the requested amount (one-third of the $5 million Qualified Settlement Fund) to be reasonable and appropriate. 2. Class Counsel's separate request for litigation expenses in the amount of $27,756.38 and settlement administration expenses in the amount of $32,640.04 is denied as the Notice of Settlement did not s pecify that such expenses would be sought. Rather the Notice implied that these expenses were included in the request for one-third of the settlement fund sought for litigation fees and expenses. 3. Plaintiffs' request for a class representati ve service awards in the amount of $7,500 each to Named Plaintiffs Jubril Pecou and Ashley Schiefer ($15,000 total) is approved. The Court finds this award to be justified under the facts of this case and consistent with applicable legal authorities. IT IS SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Mary Kay Vyskocil on 2/6/2024) (tg) Transmission to Finance Unit (Cashiers) for processing.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
JUBRIL PECOU and ASHLEY SCHIEFER,
individually and as representatives of a class
of similarly situated persons, and on behalf of
the Bessemer Trust Company 401(k) and
Profit Sharing Plan,
USDC SDNY
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
DOC #:
DATE FILED: 2/6/2024
Case No. 1:22-cv-01019-MKV
Order Granting Plaintiffs’ Motion for
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs,
Administrative Expenses, and Case
Contribution Awards
Plaintiffs,
v.
BESSEMER TRUST COMPANY and
PROFIT SHARING PLAN COMMITTEE
OF BESSEMER TRUST COMPANY,
Defendants.
This matter came before the Court on a Fairness Hearing on February 6, 2024. During the
Fairness Hearing, the Court considered, among other things, Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorneys’
Fees and Costs, Administrative Expenses, and Case Contribution Awards. Pursuant to Article 11
of the Settlement Agreement, Defendants do not take any position with respect to this motion.
Having considered the motion papers, the proposed Settlement Agreement which the Court
preliminarily approved on August 15, 2023, the arguments of counsel, and all files, records, and
proceedings in this action, the Court's approval at the Fairness Hearing of the settlement as fair,
reasonable, and adequate, and otherwise being fully informed in the premises as to the facts and
the law,
It is hereby ORDERED as follows:
1.
Class Counsel’s request for an award of $1,666,666.67 in attorneys’ fees and
expenses approved. Having reviewed Class Counsel’s application and the applicable legal
authorities, the Court finds the requested amount (one-third of the $5 million Qualified
Settlement Fund) to be reasonable and appropriate.
1
2.
Class Counsel’s separate request for litigation expenses in the amount of $27,756.38
and settlement administration expenses in the amount of $32,640.04 is denied as the Notice
of Settlement did not specify that such expenses would be sought. Rather the Notice implied that
these expenses were included in the request for one-third of the settlement fund sought for
litigation fees and expenses.
3.
Plaintiffs’ request for a class representative service awards in the amount of $7,500 each
to Named Plaintiffs Jubril Pecou and Ashley Schiefer ($15,000 total) is approved. The Court
finds this award to be justified under the facts of this case and consistent with applicable legal
authorities.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
February 6, 2024
Dated: __________________
_____________________________
Hon. Mary Kay Vyskocil
United States District Judge
2
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?