Eversheds Sutherland 11th Circuit Business Blog
content top

No Tiebreaker Necessary: Breaking with the Federal Circuit, Court Holds That Litigation Can Result in No “Prevailing Party” for Cost and Fee Shifting

In Royal Palm Properties, LLC v. Pink Palm Properties, LLC, 2022 U.S. App. LEXIS 18682 (11th Cir. July 7, 2022), the Eleventh Circuit held that there may be no prevailing party for the purposes of post-verdict cost and fee shifting. A unanimous appellate panel affirmed a district court’s denial of a litigant’s motion for costs and fees, finding that the jury’s split verdict resulted in...

Eleventh Circuit Affirms Approval of (Almost) All of Equifax Data Breach Settlement

In In re: Equifax, Inc. Customer Data Sec. Breach Litig. (Huang v. Equifax, Inc.), 2021 WL 2250845 (11th Cir. June 3, 2021), the Eleventh Circuit upheld the district court’s approval of a class settlement arising out of the Equifax data breach – except for the incentive awards to the class representatives, as to which the court reversed the district court in light of Johnson v. NPAS...

ERISA’s Fee-Shifting Provision Permits Awards Against Parties, Not Attorneys

Does ERISA’s fee-shifting provision, 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(1), permit a court to award fees against a party’s counsel?  Deciding this issue of first impression that has divided district courts within and without the Eleventh Circuit, the court in Peer v. Liberty Life Assurance Co. of Boston, 2021 WL 1257440 (11th Cir. Apr. 6, 2021), held that it does not.  Although the...

No Multiplier for Home Depot Class Action Lodestar Fee Award

In a class action settlement, one of the most difficult issues for negotiation is often how—and how much—class counsel will be paid.  In many cases, a cap on the fee is negotiated:  the defendant agrees not to object to a fee application within the cap, which can be a percentage of the so-called “common fund” received by the class in the settlement, or a fixed amount.  Less common is...

Loan Servicer’s “Obvious” Willful Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act Warrants Revival of Plaintiffs’ Claims for Emotional-Distress and Punitive Damages

Last week, in Marchisio v. Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC, 2019 WL 1320522 (11th Cir. Mar. 25, 2019), the Eleventh Circuit, taking a somewhat exasperated tone, addressed claims against a mortgage servicer whose repeated misreporting of a consumer account—even after a history of litigation and two settlement agreements—was an “obvious” violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The...

« Older Entries