Anthony Bozzo v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the court may compute the lodestar “using an hourly rate that reflects the prevailing rate as of the date of the fee request, to compensate class counsel for delays in payment inherent in contingency-fee cases”
• finding an abuse of discretion based on the district court’s failure to explain a reduction in fees from the lodestar
• “The district court also has discretion to adjust the lodestar upward or downward using a multiplier that reflects a host of reasonableness factors!.]”
• objector who fails to participate in settlement and objects only to class counsel’s fees generally does not have standing to appeal the fee award
• a large disparity between the fees requested and those awarded “requires a relatively 9 specific articulation of the court’s reasoning”
• “A ‘common fund’ exists 19 when ‘each member of a certified class has an undisputed and mathematically ascertainable 20 claim to part of a lump-sum judgement[.]’” (quoting Boeing Co. v. Van Gemert, 444 U.S. 472, 21 479 (1980))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).