Opinion ID: 216849
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Proceedings Regarding the Settlement Agreement

Text: In May 2008, the district court signed the stipulated proposed order submitted by the parties, which preliminarily approved the settlement, and set a fairness hearing regarding the settlement. The order indicated that the settlement was not entirely complete, as the parties had not reached agreement on the issue of attorneys' fees and costs; accordingly, Plaintiff's counsel was ordered to submit papers in support of an award of fees and costs. The order also required that [a]ny objections to the proposed settlement, or to any request or application for attorneys' fees and reimbursement of litigation costs and expenses, shall be filed and served twenty-one (21) days or more prior to the fairness hearing. . . . Any objection must be made in writing and include a statement of the position to be asserted, [and] the grounds therefore. . . . Notice of the settlement was mailed out to the proposed class, and advised class members of the terms of the settlement, including that VW agreed to pay Plaintiff attorneys' fees, costs and an incentive award; the parties would attempt to negotiate the amount of fees and costs; and, if those negotiations failed, the issue of fees and costs would be submitted to the court. The Notice also advised proposed class members of their options, including remaining in the settlement class without objection or either of the following: You may request exclusion from the Settlement Class. If you elect to be excluded from the Settlement Class, you will not be bound by any judgment, disposition, or settlement of the class action, and you may not participate in the settlement of this class action in any fashion. You will retain, and will be free to pursue, any claims you may have on your own behalf. . . . You may object to the Settlement. . . . Any Settlement Class member who objects to all or part of the Settlement will be bound by the Settlement regardless of whether such Settlement Class member's objections are sustained by the Court. Murray did not opt out of the class; instead, he timely served a set of objections upon the parties. Murray argued that the settlement should not be approved and Plaintiff should not receive any award of fees because (1) Plaintiff's claims lacked merit; (2) the settlement provided only illusory benefits to the class; and (3) to the extent Plaintiff's claims had any monetary value at all, that value should accrue, at least in part, to the class, rather than entirely to counsel in the form of fees. On October 6, 2008, the district court issued its Order and Final Judgment, in which it approve[d] the terms of [settlement agreement] . . . as fair, reasonable, and adequate, with the exception of attorneys' fees, costs, interest, and expenses and incentive payment issues reserved for later decision. The order stated that twenty-nine class members had filed objections and [t]hese objections to the [settlement agreement] have been considered and overruled. Murray filed a notice of appeal from the Order and Final Judgment, proposing three issues to be raised on appeal, including whether the district court abused its discretion in approving the settlement and whether Plaintiff's counsel was entitled to any fees. We later granted Murray's motion to voluntarily dismiss that appeal with prejudice.