Pincay Investments Co. v. Covad Communications Group, Inc.

Good Law
90 F. App'x 510
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 18, 2004No. 03-15158; D.C. No. CV-00-03891-PJHCalifornia661 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Charles D. Chalmers appeals pro se the district court’s approval of a plan of distribution (“Plan”), including allocation of fees, pursuant to the class action arising out of the securities fraud by Covad Communications Group, Inc. (“Covad”). We affirm.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review a district court’s approval of a plan of distribution for abuse of discretion but consider any legal questions de novo. See In re Exxon Valdez, 229 F.3d 790, 795 (9th Cir.2000). We also review the district court’s award of class counsel fees for abuse of discretion. In re FPI/Agretech Sec. Litig., 105 F.3d 469, 472 (9th Cir.1997).

Chalmers maintains that the district court abused its discretion by approving the Plan. In this regal’d, Chalmers points to several allegations of error, including that the Plan did not sufficiently describe all classes to the Plan; the method for calculating damages for each class was inappropriate; the Plan did not adequately consider the terms of Covad’s bankruptcy; and the lead plaintiffs should not have received compensation for lost wages under the Plan.

A class settlement must be fundamentally fair, adequate, and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.