Leach v. Textron, Inc et al

Filing 118

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER: For the reasons stated in the attached, the request for attorneys' fees of 30 per cent of the gross settlement fund is GRANTED. So Ordered by Judge Mary M. Lisi on 2/12/2014. (Duhamel, John)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND

IN RE TEXTRON, INC. ERISA LITIGATION
C.A. No. 09-383-ML
(Consolidated Actions)
CLASS ACTION
This Document Pertains to
ALL ACTIONS

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
This ERISA case, brought as a consolidated class action
complaint

(Dkt.

No.

28)

on

behalf

of

participants

in,

and

beneficiaries of, the Textron Savings Plan, was approved for class
action settlement on January 24, 2014 at the conclusion of a
fairness hearing in open court. (Dkt. No. 117). In addition to
certifying the class and granting final approval of the proposed
$4.375

million

settlement,

the

Court

granted

class

counsel’s

request for reimbursement of actual costs of $162,757.34 incurred
in

the

course

of

prosecuting

this

action

and

it

granted

an

incentive award of $10,000 to each of the four named plaintiffs for
their participation in this litigation.
The Court reserved its ruling with respect to the requested
attorneys’

fees

($1,213,500),

of

30

pending

percent
the

of

receipt

1

the

gross

settlement

of

additional

fund

information

concerning the lodestar1 calculation, to be provided by counsel for
the plaintiffs. Specifically, the Court inquired regarding (1)
duplication of time between counsel from different firms engaged in
the litigation, (2) hourly billing rates for attorneys in excess of
$795, and (3) billing rates for investigators and other support
staff whose role in the litigation was not described in the
plaintiffs’ submissions.
On February 7, 2014, class counsel submitted supplemental
information that addressed the Court’s concerns. (Dkt. No. 116).
Specifically, counsel explained how it had coordinated the efforts
of different law firms to avoid duplication; it detailed the
relatively small number of attorneys with higher than Providence
billing rates; and it provided additional information regarding
charges

for

in-house

investigators

and

litigation

technology

support. Counsel’s revised lodestar calculations reflect total
attorneys’ fees of $4,122,717, a reduction by $304,531 from the
initial request. (Dkt. 116-1).
The Court notes that it received a communication regarding the
requested expenses and attorneys’ fees from a class member. (Dkt.
No. 111). The Court has given due consideration to the comments of
that class member. The Court nevertheless finds that the request

1

See e.g. In re Thirteen Appeals Arising Out of San Juan Dupont
Plaza Hotel Fire Litig., 56 F.3d 295, 307 (1st Cir. 1995).
2

for counsel fees is supported by the documented efforts expended in
this case.
In light of the amended lodestar calculation, the history and
background of this litigation, and the uncertainty of the outcome,
had this case not settled, the Court concludes that counsel’s
request for attorneys’ fees of 30 percent of the gross settlement
fund - which is only a fraction of the calculated lodestar amount is fair and reasonable.
Conclusion
For the reasons stated above, the request for attorneys’ fees
of 30 percent of the gross settlement fund is GRANTED.

SO ORDERED.
/s/ Mary M. Lisi
Mary M. Lisi
United States District Judge
February 12, 2014

3