Pasparage

Pasparage v. Riverstone Networks, Inc.

Good Law
256 F. App'x 168
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 28, 2007No. 05-17272California398 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM ***

Sheldon Chandler appeals the district court order granting him attorneys’ fees in an amount less than requested for services provided as an objector to proposed attorneys’ fees for class counsel in a securities fraud putative class action settlement. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 .

The district court granted Chandler $5,000 in attorneys’ fees and $1,500 in expenses to be paid from the settlement fund. The district court denied Chandler’s request for an incentive fee.

“Attorneys’ fees awards are generally reviewed for an abuse of discretion.” Class Plaintiffs v. Jaffe & Schlesinger, P.A., 19 F.3d 1306, 1308 (9th Cir.1994). “Whether the district court applied the correct legal standard is reviewed de *170 novo.” Id. This court reviews the district court’s factual determinations for clear error. Lobatz v. U.S. West Cellular of California, Inc., 222 F.3d 1142, 1148 (9th Cir.2000).

The fee awarded to objectors “need only ‘be reasonable under the circumstances.’ ” Wininger v. SI Management L.P., 301 F.3d 1115, 1123 (9th Cir.2002) (quoting Florida v. Dunne, 915 F.2d 542, 545 (9th Cir.1990)) (addressing fees for class counsel).

“[T]he district court…

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.