S.D. New York· 1/29/2010
In re Marsh Erisa Litigation
Citations
- 265 F.R.D. 128
- 2010 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8325
- 2010 WL 451028
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- recognizing that counsel with contingent fee 10 agreement has a “strong incentive to keep expenses at a reasonable level”
- observing that the fact that the class certification motion was pending at the time of settlement created uncertainty surrounding class certification, which supported approval of the settlement
- finding the stage of the proceeding “strongly” favored approval when counsel had “reviewed millions of pages of documents, participated in 100 depositions, exchanged expert reports and rebuttal reports, and fully briefed the issue of- class certification”
- granting incentive award of $15,000 for each of three lead plaintiffs
- \The high quality of defense counsel opposing [the p]laintiffs' efforts further proves the caliber of representation that was necessary to achieve the Settlement.\
- “By their very nature, ERISA actions often present common questions of law and fact, and are therefore frequently certified as class actions.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: McMahon
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
12 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Boyd v. Coventry Health Care Inc.D. Maryland· 2014-01-31· cited 32×
- In re Colgate-Palmolive Co. Erisa LitigationS.D. New York· 2014-07-08· cited 26×
- Harris v. KoenigDistrict of Columbia· 2010-11-12· cited 15×
- Stinson v. City of New YorkS.D. New York· 2017-06-12· cited 13×
- Douglin v. GreatBanc Trust Co.S.D. New York· 2015-06-30· cited 10×
- Hallmark v. Cohen & Slamowitz, LLPW.D. New York· 2019-05-08· cited 10×
- Outten v. Wilmington Trust Corp.D. Delaware· 2012-03-15· cited 9×
- Padilla v. Maersk Line, Ltd.S.D. New York· 2010-10-26· cited 8×
- In re Nassau County Strip Search CasesE.D. New York· 2014-04-02· cited 5×
- Kindle v. DejanaE.D. New York· 2016-04-25· cited 4×
- Unnamed caseTex. App. Ct., 2nd Dist. (Fort Worth)· 2012-02-09
- Unnamed caseTex. App. Ct., 2nd Dist. (Fort Worth)· 2012-02-09
Cites
45 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court· 1950-06-05· cited 10,395×
- Blum v. StensonSupreme Court· 1984-03-21· cited 7,642×
- General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court· 1982-06-14· cited 4,068×
- Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. RussellSupreme Court· 1985-06-27· cited 1,937×
- J. I. Case Co. v. BorakSupreme Court· 1964-06-08· cited 1,399×
- City of Detroit v. Grinnell Corporation, Manhattan-Ward, Incorporated v. Grinnell Corporation, 1225 Vine Street Building, Inc. v. Grinnell CorporationSecond Circuit· 1974-03-13· cited 1,333×
- Trustees v. GreenoughSupreme Court· 1882-05-18· cited 1,026×
- Boeing Co. v. Van GemertSupreme Court· 1980-02-19· cited 897×
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Visa U.S.A. Inc.Second Circuit· 2005-01-04· cited 484×
- Goldberger v. Integrated Resources, Inc.Second Circuit· 2000-03-28· cited 476×
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,755, Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 99,074 William B. Weinberger v. James C. Kendrick, Charles M. CoyneSecond Circuit· 1983-01-26· cited 443×
- Bateman Eichler, Hill Richards, Inc. v. BernerSupreme Court· 1985-06-11· cited 322×
- Marisol A. ex rel. Forbes v. GiulianiSecond Circuit· 1997-09-26· cited 306×
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,547 Arthur Newman v. Howard M. Stein, and Morrie Benson and Rose Lerman, Objectants-AppellantsSecond Circuit· 1972-06-29· cited 268×
- In Re Drexel Burnham Lambert Group, Inc.First Circuit· 1992-03-27· cited 245×
- In Re Warner Communications Securities LitigationS.D. New York· 1985-08-20· cited 143×
- In re Global Crossing Securities & Erisa LitigationS.D. New York· 2004-11-24· cited 131×
- In re PaineWebber Ltd. Partnerships LitigationS.D. New York· 1997-03-20· cited 106×
- In Re \Agent Orange\ Product Liability Litigation Mdl No. 381Second Circuit· 1987-04-21· cited 98×
- In re Nasdaq Market-Makers Antitrust LitigationS.D. New York· 1998-11-09· cited 96×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.