# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

No. 10

- 156L

(Filed April 21 , 2017 )

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

*

*

MCCLURG FAMILY FARM, LLC, *

et al., for themselves and as *

representatives of a class of *

similarly situated persons, *

*

Plaintiff s

, *

*

v. *

*

THE UNITED STATES, *

*

Defendant. *

*

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

ORDER

For the reasons stated on the record at the conclusion of today’s fairness

hearing, the Court approves the settlement agreement and has found it to be fair,

reasonable, and adequate under R ule 23 (e) ( 2 ) of the R ules of the United States

Court of Federal Claims . The Court finds the settlement was the result of a fair

proce dure in which each side utilized its own appraisers, and was reached through

the assistance of our Alternative Dispute Resolution process . The settlement was

substantially fair, adequately compensat ing property owners

, and was fair to all

class members by categorizing property based on shared characteristics to ensure a

fair value was paid to each individual class member . The settlement amounts were represented to be close to the best possible recovery for all but one category of

properties

--- and the exception was the category which raised issues that have been

the most contentious in previous rails

- to

- trails litigation (including severance

da mages )

, reasonably reflecting litigation risks and costs.

The notice given to class members was adequate. Out of the one hundred

and twenty

- three property owners in the class , all but two affirmatively consented

to the settlement agreement

--- and the two who did not respond were a natural

person who is now deceased, and a corporation that has since dissolved. Counsel for- 2

-

the parties have represented that they will endeavor to contact the appropriate

successors to the interests of tho se class members.

Moreover, the Court recognizes that the class members have been

represented by experienced and competent counsel who zealously and effectively

represented their interests in settlement negotiations. The attorney’s fees and costs

portion of the settlemen t is a fair amount, the result of a compromise from the

lodestar calculations of class counsel.

As explained at the hearing, approval of the parties’ proposed settlement

agreement is GRANTED

. The total settlement award is $3,931,848.82, consisting

of $ 2,368,533 in principal for the value of the land the parties agree to be taken

, $ 838,315.82 in interest calculated through December 31, 2016 and statutory

attorney’s fees and cost s of $725,000 to be reimbursed to class counsel under the

Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970,

42 U.S.C. § 4654(c)

. To account for the delay in payment after December 31

, 2016

, the total interest paid by the government shall increase under the same interest

computational method as descr ibed in the settlement agreement, at an annual

interest rate of 2.77 % compounded annually, until the date that judgment is paid.

Under the agreement, plaintiffs will dismiss this case with prejudice within 14 days

of receiving the above

- described payments from defendant.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Victor J. Wolski

VICTOR J. WOLSKI

Judge