In Re Vitamin Cases
California Court of Appeal
[CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION*]
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HAERLE, J.
I. INTRODUCTION
This appeal challenges the attorney fees and costs awarded class counsel following settlement of numerous class action complaints brought against various manufacturers of vitamin products. Sandra Norris, the single objecting class member, raises many issues with respect to the award of attorney fees, but the main thrust of her appeal challenges the lodestar figure requested by class counsel, the multiplier that was applied to that figure, and the size of the resulting award as a percentage of the settlement fund. We reverse and remand with directions to the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- City of Burlington v. DagueSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- Ketchum v. MosesCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001
- Press v. Lucky Stores, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1983
- Flannery v. California Highway PatrolCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
- Livengood Feeds, Inc. v. KgaaDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2002
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Bellinghausen v. Tractor Supply Co.District Court, N.D. California · 2015
- Graciano v. Robinson Ford Sales, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2006
- Gorman v. Tassajara Development Corp.California Court of Appeal · 2009
- Consumer Privacy CasesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2009
- Donahue v. DonahueCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.