Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

ABARCA v. WERNER ENTERPRISES, INC., 8:14CV319. (2015)

Court: District Court, D. Nebraska Number: infdco20150910d09 Visitors: 11
Filed: Sep. 09, 2015
Latest Update: Sep. 09, 2015
Summary: ORDER LYLE E. STROM , Senior District Judge . This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs' motion to appoint interim class counsel under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(g)(3) (Filing No. 65 ). The defendants filed a brief in opposition (Filing No. 66 ), to which the plaintiffs replied (Filing No. 68 ). After reviewing the motion, briefs, and relevant law, the Court will grant the plaintiffs' motion. Law Under Rule 23(g)(3), the Court may designate interim class counsel before dete
More

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on plaintiffs' motion to appoint interim class counsel under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(g)(3) (Filing No. 65). The defendants filed a brief in opposition (Filing No. 66), to which the plaintiffs replied (Filing No. 68). After reviewing the motion, briefs, and relevant law, the Court will grant the plaintiffs' motion.

Law

Under Rule 23(g)(3), the Court may designate interim class counsel before determining whether to certify the action as a class action. Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(g)(3). When appointing class counsel, the Court must consider the work counsel has done in identifying and investigating potential claims, counsel's experience in handling class actions, counsel's knowledge of the applicable law, and the resources that counsel will commit to representing the class. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(g)(1)(A).

Discussion

The plaintiffs move this Court to appoint interim class counsel and propose the appointment of James M. Sitkin of the Law Offices of James M. Sitkin, Justin Swidler and Richard Swartz of Swartz Swidler, LLC, and David Borgen, Laura L. Ho, and Raymond A. Wendell of Goldstein, of Borgen, Dardarian & Ho. In addition, plaintiffs have provided the Court with declarations of the counsel's work on the current matter and previous experience in class action litigation. The defendants oppose the appointment of class counsel until the Court rules on plaintiffs' motion for class certification.

The Court finds that Rule 23(g)(3) gives the Court discretion to appoint interim class counsel before class certification. The proposed class counsel meets all the requirements under Rule 23(g)(1)(A). Therefore, the Court will grant the plaintiffs' motion. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that plaintiffs motion to appoint interim class counsel is granted.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer