IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’

MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES AND COSTS

BNVS Transport LLC and MEIN & MEEN 

TRUCKING, INC., individually and on behalf of 

all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

C&K TRUCKING, LLC, 

Defendants.

Case No. 1:20-CV-04305

HON. JOHN ROBERT BLAKEY

HON. M. DAVID WEISMAN

DATE: February 15, 2023 

TIME: 11:00 a.m. 

LOCATION: Courtroom 1203 

219 South Dearborn Street 

Chicago, IL 60604 

JUDGE: Hon. John Robert Blakey 

Case: 1:20-cv-04305 Document #: 76-4 Filed: 12/22/22 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:1587
2 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL

BNVS Transport LLC, et al. v. C&K Trucking, LLC

Before the Court is Plaintiffs BNVS Transport LLC’s and Mein & Meen Trucking, Inc.’s 

(“Plaintiffs”) Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs. The matter was heard by this Court on 

February 15, 2023, in Courtroom 1203 of the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, 

located at 219 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois 95814. Having considered the Motion, the 

briefing in support of the Motion, the declarations submitted in support, relevant legal authority, 

the record in this case, and the argument of Counsel, the Court finds as follows: 

1. Plaintiffs’ counsel seek reasonable attorneys’ fees of one-third (1/3) the net settlement fund

plus reimbursement of actual out-of-pocket costs of $47,780.86. 

2. “[A] litigant or a lawyer who recovers a common fund for the benefit of persons other than 

himself or his client is entitled to a reasonable attorney’s fee from the fund as a whole.” Boeing 

Co. v. Van Gemert, 444 U.S. 472, 478 (1980). “[T]he ‘percentage method is employed by the vast 

majority of courts in the Seventh Circuit’” in evaluating fee requests in common fund settlements. 

T.K. v. Bytedance Tech. Co., 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65322, at *66 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 25, 2022)

(quoting Hale, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 210368). Moreover, “[t]he Seventh Circuit has determined 

that . . . ‘when a settlement fund is created in exchange for release of the defendant’s liability both 

for damages and for statutory attorney’s fees, equitable fund principles must govern the court’s 

award of attorney’s fees.’” Reid, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 75383, at *15 (quoting Skelton v. Gen. 

Motors Corp., 860 F.2d 250, 256 (7th Cir. 1988)). 

3. Awards of attorneys’ fees in the amount of one-third (1/3) the net settlement amount or 

more are common. See George v. Kraft Foods Global, Inc., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 166816, at *8 

(N.D. Ill. June 26, 2012) (citing In re Ready-Mixed Concrete Antitrust Litig., 2009 U.S. Dist. 

LEXIS 132343, at *34 (S.D. Ind. Mar. 31, 2009) for the proposition that 33.33% of the common 

fund recovered is the “market rate” for fees in common fund cases); Allegretti v. Walgreen Co., 

Case: 1:20-cv-04305 Document #: 76-4 Filed: 12/22/22 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:1588
3 

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL

BNVS Transport LLC, et al. v. C&K Trucking, LLC

2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31985, 2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31985, at *10 (describing a 1/3 fee as 

market rate in complex cases) (citations omitted); see also, e.g., id. at *13-14 (awarding fees of 

33.3% of the common fund); Leung v. XPO Logistics, Inc., 326 F.R.D. 185, 203 (N.D. Ill. 2018) 

(same); Birchmeier v. Caribbean Cruise Line, Inc., 896 F.3d at 795 (affirming fee award that 

included “the sum of 36% of the first $10 million”); Garcia v. J.C. Penney Corp., 2017 U.S. Dist. 

LEXIS 131890, at *4-6 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 9, 2017) (granting fees amounting to 35% of the gross 

settlement fund); Simms v. Exacttarget, LLC, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 245963, at *27, *30 (S.D. 

Ind. Oct. 2, 2018) (recommending that the District Judge grant 35% of the net settlement fund), 

adopted by Simms v. Exacttarget, LLC, 2018 U.S. LEXIS 245994, at *1-2 (S.D. Ind. Oct. 19, 

2018). 

4. Here, Plaintiffs request attorneys’ fees of one-third (1/3) of the net settlement amount. This 

request falls within the accepted range for comparable cases. Plaintiffs’ counsel have submitted 

declarations substantiating this request and describing their work on this case. The Court finds that 

the facts support a market rate of one-third (1/3) of the net settlement amount.

5. The Court notes that the percentage-of-the-fund approach to determining the 

reasonableness of attorneys’ fee requests is the favored approach in this circuit, and “[t]he use of 

a lodestar cross-check has fallen into disfavor.” George, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 166816, at *11 

(citing In re Synthroid Mktg. Litig., 325 F.3d 974, 979-80 (7th Cir. 2003); Schulte v. Fifth Third 

Bank, 805 F. Supp. 2d 560, 598 n.27 (N.D. Ill. 2011); In re Comdisco Sec. Litig., 150 F. Supp. 2d 

943, 948 (N.D. Ill. 2001)). Nonetheless, Plaintiffs’ counsel have submitted declarations 

substantiating their fees and billing practices and demonstrating the reasonableness of their rates. 

A lodestar cross-check here also supports a rate of one-third (1/3) of the net settlement amount 

because Plaintiffs’ counsel’s lodestars are commensurate with this amount. 

Case: 1:20-cv-04305 Document #: 76-4 Filed: 12/22/22 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:1589
4

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL

BNVS Transport LLC, et al. v. C&K Trucking, LLC

6. In light of the significant relief obtained for the Classes, the skill in achieving these results, 

the complexity of class action cases such as this one, and the risks undertaken by Counsel, the 

Court finds that a fee award of one-third (1/3) of the net settlement amount is reasonable under 

applicable law.

7. Accordingly, the Court GRANTS Plaintiffs’ Motion and awards Class Counsel one-third 

(1/3) of the net settlement fund, which amounts to $___________________, and $47,780.86 in 

litigation expenses to be paid from the settlement fund pursuant to the terms and timeframe set 

forth in the settlement agreement.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: ___________________________________

The Honorable John R. Blakey

United States District Judge

Case: 1:20-cv-04305 Document #: 76-4 Filed: 12/22/22 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:1590