No. 23-1163
David G. Behenna v. Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, et al.
Tags: attorney-fees civil-rights class-action common-benefit-fund due-process legal-method lodestar-method reasonable-attorney-fee reasonable-compensation settlement
Key Terms:
SocialSecurity Antitrust Securities ClassAction
SocialSecurity Antitrust Securities ClassAction
Latest Conference:
2024-06-20
Related Cases:
23-1063
(Vide)
Question Presented (AI Summary)
When determining a reasonable attorney's fee in a class action settlement with a common benefit fund, are district courts required to apply the lodestar method?
Question Presented (OCR Extract)
QUESTIONS PRESENTED 1. When determining a reasonable attorney’s fee in a class action settlement with a common benefit fund, are district courts required to apply the method? 2. Even if it is appropriate to apply the method in a class action settlement with a common benefit fund, may district courts presume that 25% of the fund is a reasonable request?
Docket Entries
2024-06-24
Petition DENIED.
2024-06-04
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/20/2024.
2024-06-04
Reply of petitioner David G. Behenna filed. (Distributed)
2024-05-30
Waiver of the 14-day waiting period for the distribution of the petition pursuant to Rule 15.5 filed by petitioner.
2024-05-22
Application (23A1020) to file consolidated brief in opposition in excess of word limits granted by Justice Thomas. The Subscriber Respondents' consolidated brief in opposition may not exceed 13,000 words.
2024-05-13
Application (23A1020) to file consolidated brief in opposition in excess of word limits, submitted to Justice Thomas.
2024-04-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 29, 2024)
Attorneys
David G. Behenna
Daniel Hirotsu Woofter — Goldstein, Russell & Woofter LLC, Petitioner
Daniel Hirotsu Woofter — Goldstein, Russell & Woofter LLC, Petitioner
Galactic Funk Touring, Inc., et al.
Charles Justin Cooper — Cooper & Kirk, PLLC, Respondent
Charles Justin Cooper — Cooper & Kirk, PLLC, Respondent