From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kroshus v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Aug 1, 2011
CASE NO.: 3:08-cv-00246-LDG-RAM (D. Nev. Aug. 1, 2011)

Opinion

CASE NO.: 3:08-cv-00246-LDG-RAM CASE NO.: 3:09-cv-00713-LDG-RAM

08-01-2011

JUDY KROSHUS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.


ORDER


ORDER APPROVING DISBURSEMENT OF SETTLEMENT

WHEREAS, on June 15, 2011 and July 8, 2011, Counsel for Plaintiffs deposited in the U.S. Mail notice of the proposed settlements to all members of the class herein and caused the aforementioned notice to be published in the Fernley Leader and Reno Gazette-Journal for three (3) successive weeks;

WHEREAS, said notice set out the terms of the proposed settlement and procedure for distribution of settlement funds and noticed the time and place for class members to appear and object to and comment on said settlement in Court on the 29th day of July, 2011 at 10 a.m.;

WHEREAS, on July 29, 2011, at 10 a.m., the Court considered Plaintiffs' Motion for Approval of Settlement of Class Action Pursuant to FRCP 23(e) and Distribution of Funds and the Court inquired as to whether or not there were any other comments and/or objections by people and parties present or who had written to the Court or Parties, and Attorneys and Representatives;

NOW, THEREFORE, the Court being fully advised, makes the following Findings:

1) That legal and sufficient notice has been duly and regularly given to the members of the Class so as to give the members an opportunity to appear and be heard regarding the proposed settlement and distribution.

2) That the class settlement with the Board of Directors of Truckee-Carson Irrigation District, City of Fernley, and Lyon County in the amount of $10,150,500.00, is fair, just, and equitable in light of the basis upon which the Court approved the class in this matter and should be approved.

3) That the distribution formula set forth in the notice, which is based upon an engineer's analysis of the level of water on and/or in each subject property, is fair, just, and equitable and in accord with the basis upon which the Court approved the Class and should be approved by the Court. Specifically, after deducting for attorneys' fees and costs, settlement proceeds will be distributed to members of the Class according to the following formula:

Level 1- No water on Property (generally not eligible to receive settlement funds);

Level 2- Water on property but no water in garage/crawlspace;

Level 3- Water in garage and/or crawl space; and

Level 4- Water in living space. Any claim of level of water intrusion inconsistent with the engineer's analysis will be submitted to the Court for determination.

Additionally, the named Class Representatives in this action will share in the allocation of the settlement proceeds described above, except that, in addition, the named Class Representatives will each receive $1,000.00 payable from the settlement proceeds as compensation for serving as representatives of the class.

4) That in light of the complexity of the case, the very substantial time spent by the attorneys, and very substantial costs necessarily incurred in connection with the prosecution of this matter, the Court finds that Plaintiffs' request for attorneys' fees in the amount of $3,383,333.33, which equals thirty-three and one third (33 1/3) percent of the class settlement, and costs in the amount of $765,501.80, is reasonable and in accord with those customarily awarded by Courts in such matters and should be approved by the court.

NOW, THEREFORE it is hereby ORDERED that:

1) That legal and sufficient notice has been duly and regularly given to the members of the Class so as to give the members an opportunity to appear and be heard regarding the proposed settlement and distribution.

2) That the class settlement in the amount of $10,150,500.00 is fair, just, and equitable and is therefore APPROVED.

3) That Plaintiffs' request for attorneys' fees in the amount of $3,383,333.33 and costs in the amount of $765,501.80 is reasonable, and is therefore APPROVED.

4) That the method for distributing settlement funds is fair, just, and equitable, and is therefore APPROVED. After deducting attorneys' fees and costs, Plaintiffs' counsel is authorized to distribute $6,001, 164.87 to Class Members in accordance with the procedures approved herein

IT IS SO ORDERED

___________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE


Summaries of

Kroshus v. United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Aug 1, 2011
CASE NO.: 3:08-cv-00246-LDG-RAM (D. Nev. Aug. 1, 2011)
Case details for

Kroshus v. United States

Case Details

Full title:JUDY KROSHUS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Aug 1, 2011

Citations

CASE NO.: 3:08-cv-00246-LDG-RAM (D. Nev. Aug. 1, 2011)