A recent Thomson Reuters story, “Court Awards $310M in Attorneys’ Fees in LCD Case,” reports that dozens of law firms that obtained more than $1 billion in settlements in a long-running price-fixing case over display panels used in electronics have received court approval for $310 in attorneys’ fees. U.S. District Judge Susan Illston in San Francisco awarded the fees and approved a plan to allocate the money among 116 law firms that contributed to the litigation. The top two recipients were co-lead firms in the case: Zelle Hofmann Voelbel & Mason, which was allocated $75 million, and the Alioto Law Firm, which was allocated $49 million.
The law firms represented a nationwide class of retail purchasers who bought products containing thin-film liquid-crystal display panels used in a range of electronic products, including laptops and TVs. Defendants that made the panels, including Samsung Electronics Co Ltd and Hitachi Ltd, agreed to settlements totaling about $1.08 billion.
Illston’s ruling was the latest development in a contentious process over fees. Last August, she appointed a special fee master to prepare reports and issue recommendations on attorneys’ fees. The special fee master’s findings contained in reports issued November and December, prompted several objections from law firms in line to receive fees.
Among the objectors was co-lead counsel in the case, Joseph Alioto of the Alioto Law Firm. Alioto claimed he had come to an agreement with his co-lead counsel in the case, Francis Scarpulla of Zella Hofmann, divide the work and their fees equally between the “Alioto team” and the “Zelle Hofmann team.”
But the special fee master found that Alioto had not carried his burden of proof to show that such an agreement existed. In her order, Illston agreed with the special fee master’s conclusion and found that even if an agreement had existed, it likely would be unenforceable. Fee agreements among attorneys at different firms, she noted must be “in writing and signed by the clients” under federal law and California law.
The case is In re TFT-LCD (Flat Panel) Antitrust Litigation. For more information on this case, visit https://tftlcdclassaction.com. NALFA also reported on this case in “$300M Fee Allocation Dispute in Flat Panel MDL.”