In re Automotive Parts Antitrust Litigation

Docket number: 18-cv-05062-EJD (N.D. Cal.)

The Center for Class Action Fairness (CCAF) filed an objection on behalf of two car rental franchises to an an eleventh-hour request by attorneys to add $93 million to an already-generous fee award in In re Automotive Parts Antitrust Litigation. The class action has produced more than $1.2 billion in settlements, for which class counsel has already received over $269 million in fees across four rounds of settlements. The fifth and final around adds only $3.1 million to the fund, yet class counsel seeks an additional $93 million pre-interest, to push their total fee award in the “megafund” to 30%.

Class counsel told Judge Battani in June 2016 they would not seek 30% of a billion dollar fund, and this commitment was repeated in class notice for the first four rounds, which claimed attorneys would seek progressively smaller percentages in every round of settlement, which is normal as the size of a fund increases.

In Rounds 3 and 4, class counsel requested and received what they told the court was a final fee for those settlements—22% cumulatively—at the direction of then-presiding Judge Battani. A 22% fee on over a billion-dollar fund far exceeds the average in billion-dollar cases, where fees typically fall below 15%. Class counsel is well-compensated.

In 2020, Judge Battani retired to better fight her cancer, which took her life months later.

After reaching the final few, comparatively small, settlements, class counsel changed course and now seeks 30% for the entire fund, plus an indeterminate amount of interest.

The objectors oppose revisiting the prior fee awards, which were not “incomplete” as class counsel says. The objection asks the court to confirm that prior rounds are closed and that any additional award may come, if at all, only from the modest $3.1 million added in Round 5.

The objectors also seek clarity about the interest sought, because on portion of the fee motion makes it sound as if class counsel seeks interest on the entire common fund, which would inappropriately diminish class recovery. Large class claimants like the objectors have received no money from the settlements while class counsel has already received hundreds of millions of dollars 5-8 years ago. The time value on remaining funds belongs to the class, not attorneys.

A hearing has not yet been scheduled on the fee motion.

Case Documents