Lamartina v. VMware, Inc.

Background

The court considered Lead Counsel’s motion for attorneys’ fees, expenses, and an award to the class representative under 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(a)(4). The case was brought as a class action. The settlement created a cash fund of $102,500,000 for class members who submit, or submitted, valid claim forms.

Notice of the fee and expense motion was provided to identifiable class members. More than 138,100 postcard notices stated that Lead Counsel would seek fees of no more than 25% of the Settlement Amount and expenses of no more than $950,000, plus interest. No class members filed objections to the requested fees or expenses.

Court’s findings

The court applied the percentage-of-recovery method, which calculates attorneys’ fees as a percentage of the money obtained for the class. It found the requested fee fair and reasonable based on the risks of receiving no recovery, the contingent nature of the representation, the work performed, the complexity and uncertainty of the case, the result obtained, and awards in similar cases.

The court also found that Lead Counsel had spent more than 26,660 hours pursuing the action, with a stated lodestar value of $16,976,314.50. Lead Counsel had received no compensation during the action, and compensation depended on the result achieved. The court found that the settlement was obtained through Lead Counsel’s skill, perseverance, and diligent advocacy, and that the class faced a significant risk of recovering less or nothing without the settlement.

Ruling

Judge Edward J. Davila awarded Lead Counsel attorneys’ fees equal to 25% of the Settlement Amount, plus $806,188.95 in expenses and interest on both amounts for the same period and at the same rate as interest earned on the Settlement Fund. The court ordered those amounts paid from the Settlement Fund immediately upon entry of the order, subject to the settlement’s terms.

Under 15 U.S.C. § 78u-4(a)(4), the court separately awarded Eastern Atlantic States Carpenters Pension Fund $4,375 for its time and expenses representing the class. The order also stated that the court had jurisdiction over the action and related matters involving class members who had not timely and validly excluded themselves.