1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Michael Larson, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Desert Sun Pizza LLC, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. CV-16-08011-PCT-SRB

ORDER 

This matter came before the Court on Plaintiff’s Application for Attorneys’ Fees 

and Costs (Doc. 60) in the above-captioned matter (the “Action”). 

Having received and considered the Settlement, the supporting papers filed by 

Plaintiff, and evidence received by the Court in conjunction with the Application, the 

Court grants Plaintiff’s Application for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs and HEREBY 

ORDERS, ADJUDGES, AND MAKES THE FOLLOWING DETERMINATIONS: 

 1. The Named Plaintiff Michael Larson and Defendants have reached a 

Settlement of this Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”) collective action in which he 

alleged, among other things, that Defendants under-reimbursed their pizza delivery 

drivers for the vehicle expenses that they incurred in the performance of their job duties. 

It creates a Settlement Fund that will be paid out to the Named Plaintiff and the other 53 

Case 3:16-cv-08011-SRB Document 65 Filed 01/05/17 Page 1 of 3
- 2 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

opt-in Plaintiffs. Plaintiff’s Counsel have requested one-third of the Settlement Fund as 

attorneys’ fees, plus $1,263.03 for their costs, pursuant to the terms and conditions in the 

parties’ Settlement and Release Agreement. 

 2. The Court approves Plaintiff’s request for one-third of the Settlement Fund 

as attorneys’ fees. The percentage-of-the-fund method for determining fees is appropriate 

here because the benefit to the opt-in Plaintiffs is easily quantified in this common fund 

settlement and avoids the more time-consuming task of calculating the lodestar. The 

Court finds that the factors set out in Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc., 488 

F.2d 714 (5th Cir. 1974) and applied by the Ninth Circuit confirm the reasonableness of 

the requested fee. Specifically, the Court finds that Plaintiff’s Counsel obtained 

substantial recovery for the opt-in Plaintiffs in this complex case that required highly 

specialized knowledge of vehicle reimbursement claims. The Court also finds that the 

circumstances of this case – including the result, the risk taken by Counsel, and the fact 

that they are seeking a lesser percentage than agreed to by the Named Plaintiff – warrant 

attorneys’ fees of one-third of the Settlement Fund. The Court has conducted a lodestar 

crosscheck, which further confirms the reasonableness of the requested fee. The Court 

finds that the requested multiplier is well-within the range of multipliers applied in 

common fund cases in this Circuit. 

/ / / 

/ / / 

/ / / 

Case 3:16-cv-08011-SRB Document 65 Filed 01/05/17 Page 2 of 3
- 3 - 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

3. The Court also approves Plaintiff’s request for $1,263.03 in costs. The 

costs identified in the declarations submitted by Plaintiff’s Counsel are of the type that 

are charged to hourly-paying clients and are recoverable. 

 Dated this 5th day of January, 2017. 

 

Case 3:16-cv-08011-SRB Document 65 Filed 01/05/17 Page 3 of 3