In class action under Telephone Consumer Protection Act that resulted in settlement which called for defendant to make $700,000 available to pay class members, Dist. Ct. did not err in approving attorney fees for class counsel in amount of $73,468.13 or one third of $220,625 that defendant actually paid to class claimants. While class counsel argued that requested fee of $233,333.33 or one-third of $700,000 was more appropriate since settlement had created $700,000 common fund, Dist. Ct. could properly find that financial arrangement in settlement did not result in creation of common fund, since settlement did not establish definitive amount for claimants, and defendant never surrendered any funds to court or third-party administrator. As such, $73,468.13 was more appropriate fee, where: (1) class counsel’s efforts only generated $220,635 in benefits for claimants; (2) counsel had not spent significant time on case, where counsel had merely filed action and immediately engaged in negotiations which resulted in instant settlement; and (3) requested fee was disproportionate to amount of work expended by class counsel. Dist.Ct. also did not err in reducing from $15,000 to $1,000 plaintiffs’ requests for incentive awards, where record showed that said plaintiffs had spent only minimal amount of time in pursuing instant case.
