# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

No. 15

- 938

Filed: October 11, 2019

BRUCE CIAPESSONI, ELISA

CIAPESSONI, BOB F. HANSEN,

HANSEN ENTERPRISES, R&H

AGRI

- ENTERPRISES, ELDORA ROSSI,

ROSSI & CIAPESSONI FARMS, and

ROSSI & ROSSI, on behalf of themselves

and all others similarly situated, et al

,

Plaintiffs,

v.

THE UNITED STATES,

Defendant. )

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS’

FEES AND REIMBURSEMENTS OF EXPENSES

The Court has considered Plaintiffs’ Motion for an Award of Attorneys’ Fees and

R eimbursement of Expenses, and Defendant’s response thereto, and orders as follows:

The Court approves Class Counsel’s request, pursuant to RCFC 23(h) and 54(d)(2), for

an award of attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of expenses, including payment of Notice and

Administration Costs to the Settlement Administrator, from the Settlement Amount and the

Supplemental Settlement Amount 1 (together, the “Common Fund”), as follows

.

The Settlement Agreement provides that Class Counsel shall apply to the Court for an

award of attorneys’ fees of up to 25% of the Common Fund. The Settlement Agreement furthe r

provides that Defendant, the United States, agrees not to object to attorney

- fee compensation

paid from the Common Fund of up to 25% of the Common Fund. Defendant further agrees not

to object to Plaintiffs’ petition for reimbursement of reasonable, documented, actual expenses in

1 All capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the same meaning as those

set forth in the Settlement Agreement.2

connection with Plaintiffs’ litigation and settlement of this action, as well as Notice and

Administration Costs, to be paid out of the Common Fund.

Attorneys’ fees are authorized by law “on the equitable notion that lawyers are entitled to

reasonable compensation for their professional services from those who accept the fruits of their

labors.” Moore v. United States , 63 Fed. Cl. 781, 786 (Fed. Cl. 2005). The Settlement Notice

advised the Class that Class Couns el would ask the Court to award Class Counsel attorneys’ fees

equal to 25% of the Common Fund to compensate them for their efforts in investigating the

facts, litigating the claims, negotiating the settlement, and implementing the settlement on behalf

of t he Settlement Class, and for their risk in undertaking this representation on a contingent

basis, and advised them of their right to object to the requested attorneys’ fees and expenses.

The Court finds and determines that the payment to Class Counsel fr om the Common

Fund in the amount of 25% of the Settlement Amount of $85,000,000.00, or $21,250,000.00,

plus 25% of the Supplemental Settlement Amount of $882,351.60, or $220,587.90, for a total of

$21,470,587.90, is fair and reasonable. The Court finds th at the reasonableness of the fees is

supported by the following factors: (a) the quality of counsel; (b) the complexity and duration of

the litigation; (c) the risk of nonrecovery; (d) the fee that likely would have been negotiated

between private parties in similar cases; (e) lack of any Class member objections to the fees

requested by Class Counsel; (f) the percentage applied in other class actions; and (g) the size o f

the award. Moore , 63 Fed. Cl. at 786.

The Court approves Class Counsel’s request for reimbursement from the Common Fund

of reasonable expenses incurred by Class Counsel in connection with the litigation. Class

Counsel have expended $355,043.72 in reimbursable expenses, including costs of conference

call services, PACER fees, copy charges, Class Counsel’s travel costs, some past expenses of the

Settlement Administrator, and certain charges by consultants. Such expenses typically billed to

paying clients may be recovered by Class Counsel. Brown v. Pro Football , 839 F. Supp. 905,

916 (D.D.C . 1993), rev’d on other grounds , 50 F.3d 1041 (D.C. Cir. 1995). Class Counsel have

provided an itemized accounting of the litigation expenses incurred. The Court finds and

determines that payment to Class Counsel in the amount of $355,043.72 in expense

reimbursement is fair and reasonable.

The Court approves Class Counsel’s request for payment from the Common Fund of

Notice and Administration Costs to the Settlement Administrator. The Settlement Administrator

disseminated and processed opt

- in n otices to potential members of the Class and was approved

by this Court to administer the settlement notice and claims process. The Settlement

Administrator will continue to administer the claims, issue settlement checks to Settlement Class

Members, respo nd to inquiries from Class members, administer the website for the Settlement,

and perform other claims administration services for months after the Fairness Hearing. Class

Counsel have provided an itemized accounting of the Notice and Administration Cost s, including

a fixed fee for all unreimbursed past services and future services of the Settlement Administrator.

The Court finds and determines that the payment of the Notice and Administration Costs

from the Common Fund to the Settlement Administrator in the amount of $428,855.54 is fair and

reasonable.3

For these reasons, the Court grants Plaintiffs’ Motion for an Award of Attorneys’ Fees

and Reimbursement of Expenses in full, in the amounts set fort h herein.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ 

# Loren A. Smith

Loren A. Smith,

Senior Judge