Tuteur v. Metropolitan Opera Association, Inc.

Background

This class action arose from a cyberattack on the Metropolitan Opera’s computer systems. The plaintiffs alleged that the Metropolitan Opera failed to use reasonable security measures, failed to respond properly to the data breach, and failed to notify affected people promptly. They asserted claims under a New York consumer-fraud statute, negligence, breach of contract, breach of implied contract, and unjust enrichment.

The parties reached a settlement after mediation and negotiations. The settlement covered individuals who received a notice about the Metropolitan Opera’s data-security incident, including current and former employees, their dependents and beneficiaries, and vendors and donors. A valid claimant could receive reimbursement of up to $750 for ordinary losses, up to $7,500 for extraordinary losses involving actual identity theft or similar conduct, payment for one to four hours of lost time at $25 per hour, and two years of free credit monitoring. The first three categories were subject to an aggregate $450,000 cap.

The court mailed notice to more than 46,000 class members. It received 555 claims, two requests to opt out, and two objections. On March 12, 2025, the court granted final approval of the settlement and finally certified the settlement class. The remaining issue was the plaintiffs’ request for attorneys’ fees, expenses, and service awards.

Attorneys’ Fees and Expenses

The plaintiffs requested $235,108.79 in attorneys’ fees and $14,891.21 in expenses, for a total of $250,000. They primarily proposed calculating the fee as a percentage of the settlement’s value, using the lodestar method as a cross-check. The lodestar is the reasonable number of hours worked multiplied by reasonable hourly rates.

The court did not decide the parties’ dispute over the settlement’s total value because it concluded that the settlement was not a common-fund settlement. Instead, it was a claims-made settlement in which the Metropolitan Opera separately agreed to pay the fees, so the fees would not reduce benefits paid to class members. The court therefore evaluated the request under the lodestar method and a more relaxed reasonableness review applicable to that type of settlement.

The two law firms reported 591.9 hours of work and a lodestar of $439,713.50. The work included investigating the claims, drafting pleadings, responding to the motion to dismiss, participating in mediation, negotiating the settlement, seeking preliminary approval, coordinating the settlement administrator, and responding to class members. After reviewing detailed time records, the court found no significant duplication or inefficiency. Even assuming a 25 percent reduction in the hourly rates, the court stated that the lodestar would still be $329,785—substantially more than the requested fee.

The court also found that the fee negotiations occurred after the substantive settlement terms had been reached and appeared to have been conducted at arm’s length. It concluded that the $235,108.79 fee request was reasonable and that the $14,891.21 in expenses, mainly mediation fees, was adequately supported and reasonable. The court therefore approved the total award of $250,000.

Objections

One class member objected that the fee request lacked proof of the time spent and the hourly rates. The court found that the later fee materials and time records supplied that information and treated the objection as moot. Another class member argued that the fee was grossly disproportionate to the $450,000 aggregate liability cap and should not exceed 10 percent of the actual liability. The court rejected that argument and overruled both objections.

Service Awards

The court approved service awards of $2,500 each for Rebecca Tuteur, Anthony Viti, and Matthew Napoli. The court relied on counsel’s representations that the named plaintiffs helped investigate the case, communicated with counsel, reviewed pleadings and settlement terms, and publicly served as plaintiffs. The court also noted that the awards would not reduce the benefits available to other class members and were consistent with awards in similar cases.

Disposition

Judge Gary Stein granted the plaintiffs’ application for $250,000 in attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses and approved the three $2,500 service awards. The court stated that the fee order and the earlier order granting final approval of the settlement resolved all claims and issues. It dismissed the matter with prejudice and without costs except as provided in the order, while retaining jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter for purposes of interpreting and implementing the settlement.