Feierstein v. Correvio Pharma Corp.
- Valerie Caproni
- 1:19-cv-11361
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Feierstein v. Correvio Pharma Corp., Judge Caproni awarded Rosen Law Firm $243,902.40 in fees and $50,602.43 in expenses from the settlement fund.
The Rosen Law Firm received the fee and expense awards but was subject to the five-year certification requirement. The Settlement Class and the three named lead plaintiffs were affected by the payments from the Settlement Fund. The order awarded $500 each to Clinton Atkinson, Nabil Saad, and Iuliia Mironova.
What happened
Feierstein v. Correvio Pharma Corp. involved Rosen Law Firm’s request for attorneys’ fees and litigation expenses after the parties appeared at a fairness hearing concerning their settlement. The firm requested $437,500, equal to 25% of the $1.75 million settlement fund.
The court said Rosen had improperly used Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP as co-counsel after the court declined to appoint Glancy as co-lead counsel. The court also questioned whether the two firms’ billed hours were reasonable for a case that settled before a response to the motion to dismiss and before formal discovery.
Judge Caproni awarded Rosen $243,902.40 in fees and $50,602.43 in expenses from the settlement fund, plus $500 to each of three lead plaintiffs. She also required Rosen, for five years, to certify that it would not assign class-related legal work to an unappointed law firm without first seeking court permission.
The detailed version
- Feierstein v. Correvio Pharma Corp. · No. 1:19-cv-11361
- Valerie Caproni
- May 19, 2021
Background
The order addressed Lead Counsel’s motion for attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of litigation expenses in connection with the settlement. Notice of the fee motion was provided to identifiable Settlement Class Members. The court found that the notice satisfied Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, due process, and other applicable requirements.
The Rosen Law Firm, which the court had appointed as Lead Counsel, requested $437,500 in fees, representing 25% of the $1.75 million Settlement Fund. Rosen supported the request with a lodestar cross-check, a method that estimates fees by multiplying reasonable hours by reasonable hourly rates.
The court had previously declined to appoint Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP as co-Lead Counsel because the plaintiffs had not explained why two firms were needed or provided a plan for dividing responsibilities, avoiding inefficiencies, and limiting unnecessary costs. Despite that ruling, Rosen used Glancy as co-counsel without asking the court to reconsider or informing the court that it intended to do so. Rosen’s fee submission combined the hours claimed by attorneys at both firms. The court was skeptical that the work was not duplicated and found the combined hours substantially greater than what it would have expected from experienced securities litigators in a case that settled at an early stage.
Court’s ruling
Judge Caproni awarded Lead Counsel $243,902.40 in attorneys’ fees from the Settlement Fund. The court used a lodestar of $174,216.80, counting only the hours claimed by Rosen attorneys, and applied a 1.4 multiplier. The court found that the Rosen attorneys’ hours alone were reasonable because the case settled before the plaintiffs responded to the motion to dismiss and before formal discovery. The fee award equaled 13% of the Settlement Fund, and the court found it fair and reasonable.
The court separately awarded Lead Counsel $50,602.43 in reimbursement for litigation expenses and found that award fair and reasonable. It awarded Lead Plaintiffs Clinton Atkinson, Nabil Saad, and Iuliia Mironova $500 each from the Settlement Fund for work related to representing the Settlement Class.
The order also required that, for five years, any application by Rosen to serve as Lead Counsel or co-Lead Counsel in a case governed by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act include a certification that Rosen would not direct class-related legal work to a law firm that the court had not appointed as co-Lead Counsel without specifically seeking court permission. The order stated that it would become null and void to the extent provided by the settlement agreement if the settlement terminated or its effective date failed to occur. The clerk was directed to close the fee motion.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.