Young v Diversified Consultants Minnesota FDCPA - 13-7

8/13/2019 Young v Diversified Consultants Minnesota FDCPA - 13-7

1/10

poposedcl stmet ionre fvobl t the clas mbe." N/Ru,

21 9 :lj 3 In the prencse, Couraprove a "Noic hat was u ishJ!

/4 aiony in A A pap. Te Ne e h are of

, th ns of ped eent, asd ls me o a

6 j o he m n odu o . id

7 embr o blt o op-t o th cla d ivduy se

ow ims T , C has o te of ne obt

Selee o n op o t . T n e lk o s

mbe ve fsed ippl of Stemn dots q d asobenss o t S hs

g or opo i g he S

7 Te sk th s eii cd i ia ooa o Sttm

2 004 t Co t Pl' io cas ecaiow 1638 (D. Jl

9 04) Hwve Ye Rule C ma vt po grat o a a i

Jd o me b n jg")

ul be eete m gton w o o

eFed

RCiv 3 ("I

e o ts t

es m a opriat es 4 rquig at ple dings e nd eeo ai ato bs ns n ha o rocee co )

D ; 275 F3d 849 28 9 C00) Ge t c s an pre a m s e


2/10

:

2

3

4

5

7

8

9

0

1

6

9

0

4

27

8

-

c,te Cour acknowledgsthasomeriskexs wi respct to mtifnot \.

l:bei ble tmaintanlsco uhrougia. ever, the Court

't

ate,n dfndat soughttoecertift cl ss or hasraisda(rp

ace ofthis cto a ssaction. Moreve, s Cur

oesnotprevtheCourfmgain

swihte Cu's drwhateig, if

any, is be gven o th torsued todeterinefnl

apal of a etl nt suld grand. Se

I xer thiCur's discrtion, anbase theabsencfany

qu ntif le hr or indcatin of dertcaion, theCou ds hat isfoe' 1 in fvr f apog e selmn

2. M tion fr ompesa tin andFees to the PlanifSom courts have recognizd thacla rpntives arentiled o

compensati fr the rsk and iovce nuredon behalfof theclas. Jn re

Cont'! Il. Sec Litig, 962 Fd 56, 71 (th Cir99). This practice is not

univesay eded ut mn court will gn iceve if thy e roable.

In re Chambs Dv. Sc L, 91 F .Sup 82 63 (I 95).

The c ha dscr o cide wher eaeme e l e

w o a av V

k A!. Richfeld Co 90up4 99 (DCl l99 W

ee ntv wards o my coni the flln: "I) rk to

c rv in omg , b aa d thwi; 2) e

otor prsn l ifculs eoud the l pav 3) t

u m d n by cass rpstav; 4 h duratin of e

io ; 5) peol bft ( c of ejyd b s

eprea ul the tg_on." I; D v. J &

- 16


3/10

205 esaw 3856 at *31 NY Feb.18, ) (In r!g

{ cmpensaty awrd o he eseniv plin SLR c lass actions;" court

3se cirumtacs nuding th personal isk

pIi'tf n

i i4 becomg a a itif he ad fo exendd y h plain

5 prosecuting the ltigaon,ny otr burd se bythat plainf n leding

6 hself or elf to prosecutig lam, and i recvy."

7 Acrg Paf elaaon he be atvy n

et f aion o reviewn ad obing docen a Jega

9 ae b fl tteti c ohe vicm a pbl

0 eenae ado g to cov pea , avelig ad ndig e ad wo mdiations ad mg Plifs cue moito h iga n og o,

atais s prvide sg o an en t

oewe been dedica o t a an eu h cais he Ca were efect ively proseced. Duing thecourse of ltgaion, Plainf

reviewd, aong other hngs, vriou daf complaints amended colaints

7 motin aers, integaories ad document requets and reponses. Fr hes reason, P laintfthe amouns requestdare easonabl.

Planti dcrsa e sal immpoye fthe Rve Cnty SherfsDepament nd that a ivesdover 125h f tm prcgiil igain, ugtsfn his l-dy epositn ad3 aedingtwo l-day mdiais. Plafrque 25 0 ,A i4 f125 hour ofwhich0 wr pe- ad75 wrepos-litigain. t iswthin thsCourt's dscretion to award nceiv fes tonamd clas

epesetavna o. Van rke v. At. RichfeldCo.,90 l

F.Supp 294, (N.DCal1995) (holdingthaaincentivewardof$5,000

proewhere thenaed plitif helped ltgaion hat lasedfrmyy


4/10

-

. -ee as a key wness a ral;n eroay bet lttl m the -

tlJ

l iiga on :. 3 Hee, seval fctors upr Plaintfs rqut f n ctive awfd.14 Liigaion of h ls c ae almost to yas ber th ce

seld. Mreov, Panaed C osel thougot h ghy a

risky.case. Paif s etedto uh cmpeation frhiefort duringth

7 ltigtio8

9 3. Plant Cosel' Alcaion A Award Of treys' Fees Rmbuset Exp Th quit o pea ee y Ht qay f e lt

1 c diculties fd, th a eecy of h ove,

13 xpenc a exie o e coun, th sk1 d prfalsm

wit wc oe proutd cas a h fce qly pig cuse." In 4 6

194 (ED. Pa 200). He, Plaintf couebrog casearculting heo

fclas rcovry ta had nevr bn brought bfre, tocunel'sknowldge.

8 Counselhad laid thegoundwrkfr tscase throug tei suc on e meri

fthe FCRAcm neaerdvidul aes. Bylyng the properfudin

0 ri clas cae, couselwaboachiv a e tvlyrapd fcen

21 solutinofthCas' claim. Coune havewide rang oxprce

22 nur casaionligon, evideedbhe imi t in

pecivDeclartos, cited sp. Cousel haveabeencrifed n

cum clss anmany ime, yoterswch tstamt kl

25 xprtiandreputio.

W gn n o be lngthyto, eae

havg eched selemen wthin2 yeas fer th casewasfild, many ou of

28 frt werexpeddinachevingv itories in nivdulFCRAlgatna lad

- 18


5/10

grwrk s ss n Hn

L; refence to the duatioof thiscae only , butmust lsk io acun

many months flitgai olved in idvul cs h oe te fn

(,

supra. se poteniay quie cmplted

i of laby a wch , ued would ivole a ong otred litgatio he ptie a o s crfai to

7 me Pli 1as.

Whie counsl pt may or o a cs h wa onud w w

9 a a wa ed thse or we n u baed . T beg cl eicto wa hoough an crica, ad e lmn1 go, uar w averr a rorced rqig lngthy conc wt Medi-Jug Sk n exge ad revss f

nume df ten oms.

4 A n atced Dea ul a xbi ugh 3

thenumberof oudevote to i caeby thre lawfms serving as Clas

Counsel ot torey hors and 24.83 lega-istan hours. (Thse fgure do no includel he hourdevotedby counsel i casehat lead t

18 eon hatw istrume in c ievinghtlem hiae.)

thigcnsidered , umbefoursevotedtotisse d the ons ht went

bfr netabng th vabioPlitfcu actoac r

t or supprts e que w: Even fon. t hous vooi

ptclar cse wee odre, e reqeted fee s easoae.

23 In a, Plaitifestoey' eand of$425,0 wc

24 is based onratesof$300.0 o350per hurplusamueof

aproxaly 27f coueJ ldtr,dusebow Isumary, Paif

qsfranawfa ct a sLodestarieonbl ud

al'the usfctors.


6/10

.

'.

2

.

-

A Lodestar ys Confrs That e F qu t iReaonable

A revs Lodsa anlyisp case incats hat f purpose f

4 suppring a upwar cm ofhuly fs n c ig a fir awrd f cass

5 cun l how te llwng:

6 C ompa n ttoy dar wh a e rqust 7 undr h cge f e mod Ifc-ek"

8 aal See, .g. zcio, 290 F.3d

150; F hl, 307 F.3d 1. 1[T] a ci

lpl i suggtn ig ca w Iitgn h

a

ben poacd [] may pde l s n

aas f ven rcntag awrd." Vzno 290 F.3

3 105 In uti Ca co, s omn fr a ose 'osr1 gur o b jsd upw b le eg a vay

cor such te efr xpnded by nl he clx h

case,ndthe riskasumd bycounel.SeeRavisent, 205 W

906361, at* 2 (erepesenea muliper o 3. l ofth loastr);

Linerboad, 204W 12350, at*16 (recoizngthafom201

9 to 203, thevrage multier approvd incmmon fd asws

4.35); Culen, 197 F .RD at 50- (loadstr of$ 1 .2 milonwuld

equir a multipli of2.1 nordrt mch wrdes of

2 o-hidof$7.3 milloncomnu); SafCmt, 16

23 F.Sup2da 103 (oadst of$534,0 wod reqire amltiler

2.81 iorderto machawaded es of$15 millin); Mdica

X-Ry, 1998 W665 at *7 (fe rpsnda multiper on the

tos' l f1.67); CrazyEdie, 824 F.Sup t36-7 (the

27 equivalnt ofa 1.72 mulipler was applied thaoys' loadstar).

JnreHritage BondLitg., supra 2005 W 159403, *2.

- 0


7/10

'! A)'

Th ld expnse 41r as I }e @ dcribe i osl' .: rspctiveDlaron are s lw Cosumr Ad Tax LwOfc J3 Rber Spl, $53,760.0 ctin ovr 179.2o ofoyie d no

't

4 os(se Ae l); msLyon& Aoi.te,P, $136457

5 refctng 8 hours ofatoey time ad 18 hous fprleg time, ad

6 cots of$1,82.6 (see Apedix 2); an, fr the Cnumr J n P.A,

7 $38)8250 rectg4 hu f t 16 hr o pa time,

a ot of $8,823.86 (se Apix 3). Timr a ose as $2788.25

9 nd coss a $1045.2, r a a otal f 3647

lO

b. H ury R Theryats frthe rmsofPlaintcounel el wihn trg

ofwh is reasonabl d aprote i hs mkt. SeDeclartins of c1e

fd ache eto. Te uryaefrthe as i th frms are-th ame

glar curent ar fr hei vcs in str no-a

1 maters, cdg cn a -inent es Te has

17 ay ra om te ' o at o cunt r e

8 e ompexiy or d rk or ti cton . Th os 9 e pacc rea rct litg The h r

0 w age hag b at cbl xprince vs

1 ce cass a ta f a m a h ad bopy f

2 ac f s cu n the Dain d a Docke #52, 3 54

c Hu xpende25 I f i mi, e Pa a es

detae, cntmporaously i cfg of wk

27 prfnd, h toy prfing th ok the ae of e w, themou

of tim spent d h urlyaechargfr ttask. Iludn the time

-


8/10

!

d

.

rcds ae albit consvve, m of "t\

spen n the cas f the d f thi . Ts ubmio radymeh hi Circut's eqmn of h g of specity rquid a pay s k n

1 ,

atoeys' in mr cs. v. JPD ,

C 000. Cel' bmisson l e requr r ut

6 - ard GA1R, CIV-S04-65 DFL CMK i

7 (EDal Au. 19, 2005) Th ln submite rew e

b dvo of l g m an r ef gae he c

in a f a. Tre wa m f whc cmat i w

qudin

a

w "x a o e "1 k 6 l U 2 3 9 Ld 98)

Al s rsy sry ve ss

13 oucomer te Plainti ad h Clas.

d.

Th Declarations ofcunel fdsmultanly herewithshwat o

aefrhtherin wereicurd ineprsecution of thiscas. Th blk os

18 swer f xpe rot, legaleearchevis, travel mesenge c

telephn clisandcopyngcharges frpledgs,documents, . AUf the

cos wre advncdby Plitif counsel dwncesarily ired. Ptif

shud beawredthe ureimbd cot nfl.

//

7


9/10

'- SS .

t ,

v C ey 1 GRN thejoinf! !lI WAO /i,.

setlmnt;dia e"l1e'.ds i ,;oI A AP1 Il l, 11a ASi:trdWcln 2 Pnfs n wd atoreys' fs,aspr c ction tlmen.'i&M - l _{, ,I

6 pJ' '" ; A/4t1Vfj" (F J I 1#7 ITSORDE . P b1t,'

8 DATED: :/,

M1 1 Sat Drc 1

15

8

26


10/10

. p . lFEB-(TU) d:O

: ;'ERTfOF ERSO TcJ ItCV '.:'i, !I

tmp 6 I a [PROD N (A V T ; G ) PLNTF'S OF Y' PE L SETM, & x M :

iS

H J. FujBU C W Blv 5L 0 I : U@c.

, K

Documents

Young v Diversified Consultants Minnesota FDCPA - 13-7