Berger v. Wang
- Jesse Furman
- 1:19-cv-06229
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 1
In Berger v. Wang, Judge Furman required more records before reviewing a proposed settlement involving two infant children.
Melissa Berger and infant children A.G. and M.B., whose proposed settlement could not yet be reviewed on the submitted documentation.
What happened
In Berger v. Wang, Melissa Berger submitted a proposed settlement order for claims involving infant children A.G. and M.B. The court was required to review the settlement to protect the children’s interests.
The submission claimed $14,149.54 in costs and disbursements and $78,471.47 in attorney’s fees from the settlement fund. But it did not adequately explain the work performed, itemize the costs, or provide receipts, invoices, or other proof of the expenses.
Judge Jesse M. Furman ordered Berger to submit sufficient supplemental records and documentation by June 15, 2020. The order did not approve or reject the proposed settlement.
The detailed version
- Berger v. Wang · No. 1:19-cv-06229
- Jesse Furman
- June 11, 2020
Background
Melissa Berger, individually and on behalf of infant children A.G. and M.B., submitted a proposed Infant Compromise Order. Under the Southern District of New York’s local rule, a settlement involving an infant requires court approval. The court must review charges against the settlement fund, determine whether attorney’s fees and expenses are reasonable, and distribute the remaining proceeds in a way that best protects the infant’s interests.
Court’s Analysis
The court found that Berger’s supporting submission was inadequate for that review. It specifically identified claimed payments of $14,149.54 for costs and disbursements and $78,471.47 in attorney’s fees. A ledger did not identify the specific work performed or who performed it, did not itemize the claimed costs and disbursements, and was not accompanied by receipts, invoices, or other proof of the expenses.
Order
Judge Jesse M. Furman ordered Berger to submit supplemental records and documentation sufficient for the court to review the proposed settlement by June 15, 2020. The opinion does not state that the court approved or rejected the settlement.
Read the full 1-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.