A recent Law 360 story by Dorothy Atkins, “Juul’s $255M MDL Gets Nod, Judge Mulls $76.5M Atty Fee Bid”, reports that a California federal judge said he plans to approve Juul's $255 million settlement despite multiple objections in order to resolve multidistrict litigation alleging the vape maker marketed its addictive nicotine products to adolescents, but he plans to hold off on deciding class counsel's $76.5 million fee request.  During an hour-long hearing held via Zoom, U.S. District Judge William H. Orrick told the parties "there's no doubt in my mind that the overall settlement achieved thus far across the class … has been fair, reasonable and adequate."

"I think the overall settlement rendered a fine recovery for the class," he said.  "[The case] was well litigated by very good lawyers, and it was hotly contested and risky and the negotiations were certainly at arm's length — further than arm's length. I do think the settlement was good."

After hearing arguments from objectors' counsel, the judge said he plans to overrule the objections and approve the deal.  But he added that he wants to hold off on deciding class counsel's request for 30% of the gross settlement for attorney fees until after he reviews the expenses and other case records, and after he decides whether to sign off on a separate $235 million settlement with Juul's co-defendant Altria Group Inc., the parent firm of Philip Morris USA that acquired a 35% stake in Juul five years ago.

"All of these things considered, I plan to defer making [a ruling on] attorney fees and costs until I learn more about how work is being compensated, how expenses are being determined by the fee committee and [until I] see the Altria analysis, so that I do this at one time with a full picture of all the things," he said.  Judge Orrick noted that he's considering the class counsel's requested attorney fees in Altria's deal "to be sure excessive fees aren't paid."

Altria, which struck its deal mid-trial and months after Juul reached a settlement, filed its motion for preliminary settlement approval last month, and as of Wednesday afternoon, a hearing on the motion had not yet been set, according to the docket.  The San Francisco-based Juul announced its deal with the plaintiffs, which include adolescents, school districts, municipalities and Native American tribes, in December just as the sprawling litigation headed to bellwether trials led by California schools.

Juul and the class later unveiled details of the proposed $255 million settlement, which Judge Orrick preliminarily approved in late January.  The deal allows class members to submit claims for up to $1,600 per year of Juul product purchases with proof of purchase, with an overall cap of 150% of the value of their total purchases, or 300% of total purchases if their first purchase was made under the age of 18.  Class members without proof of purchase will have their claims capped at a lower amount.

Meanwhile, class counsel sought 30% of the gross settlement fund, or $76.5 million, in fees and $6 million in expenses.  The deal would resolve claims of economic loss by thousands of potential class members nationwide.  But since then, multiple groups of class members have objected to the proposed settlement, with the Public Health Advocacy Institute representing three objectors who argued in their brief that the agreement does nothing to address the public health crisis caused by young people vaping, and the court shouldn't approve it unless $30 million of the settlement is dedicated to developing treatment methods for adolescents with nicotine addiction.