Law.com
  • News
    • Newswire
    • Large Firm
    • Corporate Counsel
    • Technology
    • Washington
    • Supreme Court
    • International
    • Legal Blog Watch
    • Video
  • Publications
    • The American Lawyer
    • Corporate Counsel
    • Law Technology News
    • The National Law Journal
    • New York Law Journal
    • New Jersey Law Journal
    • Connecticut Law Tribune
    • The Legal Intelligencer (PA)
    • Daily Business Review (FL)
    • Delaware Law Weekly
    • Daily Report (GA)
    • The Recorder (CA)
    • Texas Lawyer
    • Publication E-Alerts
    • More Publication Sites
  • Legal Research & Directories
    • Books Online
    • Smart Litigator
    • ALM Experts
    • Verdict Search
    • Court Reporters
    • Legal Dictionary
    • LegalTech® Directory
    • Newsletters
    • More Directories
  • Surveys, Lists & Rankings
    • Amlaw 100
    • NLJ 250
    • Global 100
    • The A-List
    • ALM Legal Intelligence
    • Surveys
    • More Lists & Rankings
  • lawjobs.com
    • Post a Job
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Resume
    • The Careerist Blog
    • News & Views
  • LawCatalog Store
    • Books Online
    • Best-Selling Books
    • Books
    • Directories
    • E-Newsletters
    • Magazines
    • Newspapers
    • Newsletters
    • Surveys
    • Research Services
    • Webinars
    • Events
  • CLE & Events
    • CLE Center
    • ALM Events
    • LegalTech
    • Virtual LegalTech
    • Insight Legal Events
    • Webinars
Home
 
Article
  • email
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • alert
  • rss

Law.com Home > Lowered Fee Cap May Scuttle $3 Billion Settlement

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Lowered Fee Cap May Scuttle $3 Billion Settlement

By Brian Baxter All Articles 

The American Lawyer

May 7, 2010

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •       Comments (2)
 

Related Items

  • Wyoming Senator Pitches $50 Million Cap on Fees in Cobell Case

Congressional approval of one of the largest class action settlements in U.S. history is getting hung up on the issue of legal fees for plaintiffs lawyers.

The $3.4 billion Indian trusts settlement agreed to in December could be scuttled if Congress doesn't approve the terms of the agreement by May 28, according to The Associated Press.

The tentative settlement would close the books on a class action filed in 1996 on behalf of 300,000 American Indians. The plaintiffs in the suit claimed that as trustee for 145 million acres of land under the Dawes Act of 1887, the U.S. Department of the Interior mismanaged trust accounts and allowed the federal government to give the best land to white settlers. The settlement calls for plaintiffs to be paid $1.4 billion -- about $1,500 per class member- -- and for a $2 billion fund to be set up to buy American Indian land.

The potential snag now, as reported by sibling publication The Blog of Legal Times, is a move by Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming to cap attorney fees in the case at $50 million. That has one of the plaintiffs lawyers who spent years litigating the matter crying foul.

Dennis Gingold -- a solo practitioner in Washington, D.C., who serves as lead counsel to the plaintiffs -- told the AP that he will terminate the settlement and resume litigation unless Congress approves the agreement without altering any of its terms. Gingold told The BLT that Barrasso's sentiments fly in the face of a previous fee cap of $100 million agreed to in December, which would give Gingold and his co-counsel at Kilpatrick Stockton fees totaling between $50 million and $100 million.

Were Gingold and Kilpatrick Stockton to split $100 million, they would be taking a total cut of roughly 7 percent of the $1.4 billion settlement figure; the lawyers' share shrinks to about 3 percent if the $2 billion trust called for under the proposed settlement is figured in. Either way, the fees would be well below what has been paid out to plaintiffs lawyers in other major class actions such as the one against Enron, as noted by lead plaintiff Elouise Cobell, a former treasurer of Montana's Blackfeet Nation, in a story by Legal Newsline.

Calls to Gingold and Kilpatrick Stockton litigation partner Keith Harper were not returned by the time of this post. The American Lawyer named both lawyers Litigators of the Week last year for their efforts in reaching an agreement. Kilpatrick disclosed in December 2008 that it had already plowed more than $22 million in legal fees and expenses into the case.

Two years ago The National Law Journal, a sibling publication, named Harper one of its 50 Most Influential Minority Lawyers in America. Before joining Kilpatrick Stockton, Harper was a litigator with the American Indian Rights Fund in Washington, D.C.

Before Harper and Gingold can be compensated for their efforts, the settlement must overcome the final stages of political and legal scrutiny. Gingold told The BLT last week that Barrasso was one of the few opponents raising hackles over the agreement's terms, noting that plaintiffs "have very strong supporters in the House and Senate."

Even if Congress approves the settlement by the May 28 deadline -- the third such deadline the case has seen to date -- it must also be approved by U.S. district court Judge James Robertson.

This article first appeared on The Am Law Daily blog on AmericanLawyer.com.



Subscribe to The American Lawyer

You must be signed in to comment on an article

 

Reader Comments

  • Kimberly Craven

    May 07, 2010 11:26 AM

    Like many of the 384,000 federally recognized tribal members who are certified members of the class action lawsuit, Cobell v. Salazar, I was pleased when I learned the Obama Administration and the four named plaintiffs had reached a settlement in December 2009. But after a careful reading of the full settlement, I am disappointed and outspoken in my efforts to educate Indian Country about its ramifications. As the old adage goes, the devil is in the details of what the plaintiffs have agreed to in exchange for settling their 14 year old lawsuit. I see three key issues that must be resolved before the settlement is ratified by Congress and goes back to the Court.

    First, the plaintiffs have agreed to the Administration’s request to create a totally new class of plaintiffs to extinguish claims which are entirely outside the scope of the current litigation. The new class, for $500 plus a formula amount, is asked to forever extinguish all their claims for the past mismanagement of their land and its resources – timber, water, grazing or other economic use. The Cobell suit was filed in a Court of Equity that could order an historical accounting as a remedy but it is NOT a court that could award monetary damages. But yet, here we are being offered $3.4 billion dollars? The Obama Administration seems determined “to wipe the slate clean” and “turn a page” without even bothering to find out what is on the slate and whether the page can or should be turned at this time. To many Indian people, a new beginning will consist of restoring and repatriating our homelands to tribes and Indian families in a way that has never occurred before. This new class needs to be dropped out of the proposed settlement. Then the original accounting class might receive between $3,000 to $4,000, not the $1,000 currently proposed.

    Secondly, $2 billion of the settlement goes to the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to purchase back fractioned lands, through the Indian land Consolidation Act that will eventually be returned to the tribes. Neither the tribes, their members or the lawsuit plaintiffs will have any say over which lands are repurchased and consolidated. Rather, the agency most responsible for mismanagement of Indian land will be given sole discretion. After 10 years, any unspent funds revert back to the Treasury. To me, this is an illusory promise and the “reverter clause” is highly frowned upon in class action settlements. The $2 billion should be put in a permanent trust fund account for the tribes where the interest may be spent on repatriating and restoring lands, for tribes and Indian families who want to reclaim their ancestral homelands.

    Finally, a $60 million scholarship fund builds from small rebates when Indian people sell their fractioned interest in land. If the seven attorneys named in the proposed Cobell Settlement get their $50 to $100 million right away, let’s endow the scholarship fund upfront and start making funds available immediately for Native youth so often caught in a web of hopelessness. If the attorneys get $100 million -- for parity’s sake --let’s dedicate the same to our youth.

    Sen. Thomas Barrasso (R-WY) has asked Tribes and Indian people to submit their ideas about how the settlement might be strengthened to better meet the needs of Tribes and Indian people. I appreciate this good faith effort much more than the current efforts to tack the required settlement legislation onto other Congressional bills without benefit of a public hearing on the merits. Transparency is an important element for a healthy democracy – even for Indians.

  • Kimberly Craven

    May 07, 2010 11:20 AM

    Like many of the 384,000 federally recognized tribal members who are certified members of the class action lawsuit, Cobell v. Salazar, I was pleased when I learned the Obama Administration and the four named plaintiffs had reached a settlement in December 2009. But after a careful reading of the full settlement, I am disappointed and outspoken in my efforts to educate Indian Country about its ramifications. As the old adage goes, the devil is in the details of what the plaintiffs have agreed to in exchange for settling their 14 year old lawsuit. I see three key issues that must be resolved before the settlement is ratified by Congress and goes back to the Court.



    First, the plaintiffs have agreed to the Administration’s request to create a totally new class of plaintiffs to extinguish claims which are entirely outside the scope of the current litigation. The new class, for $500 plus a formula amount, is asked to forever extinguish all their claims for the past mismanagement of their land and its resources – timber, water, grazing or other economic use. The Cobell suit was filed in a Court of Equity that could order an historical accounting as a remedy but it is NOT a court that could award monetary damages. But yet, here we are being offered $3.4 billion dollars? The Obama Administration seems determined “to wipe the slate clean” and “turn a page” without even bothering to find out what is on the slate and whether the page can or should be turned at this time. To many Indian people, a new beginning will consist of restoring and repatriating our homelands to tribes and Indian families in a way that has never occurred before. This new class needs to be dropped out of the proposed settlement. Then the original accounting class might receive between $3,000 to $4,000, not the $1,000 currently proposed.



    Secondly, $2 billion of the settlement goes to the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to purchase back fractioned lands, through the Indian land Consolidation Act that will eventually be returned to the tribes. Neither the tribes, their members or the lawsuit plaintiffs will have any say over which lands are repurchased and consolidated. Rather, the agency most responsible for mismanagement of Indian land will be given sole discretion. After 10 years, any unspent funds revert back to the Treasury. To me, this is an illusory promise and the “reverter clause” is highly frowned upon in class action settlements. The $2 billion should be put in a permanent trust fund account for the tribes where the interest may be spent on repatriating and restoring lands, for tribes and Indian families who want to reclaim their ancestral homelands.



    Finally, a $60 million scholarship fund builds from small rebates when Indian people sell their fractioned interest in land. If the seven attorneys named in the proposed Cobell Settlement get their $50 to $100 million right away, let’s endow the scholarship fund upfront and start making funds available immediately for Native youth so often caught in a web of hopelessness. If the attorneys get $100 million -- for parity’s sake --let’s dedicate the same to our youth.



    Sen. Thomas Barrasso (R-WY) has asked Tribes and Indian people to submit their ideas about how the settlement might be strengthened to better meet the needs of Tribes and Indian people. I appreciate this good faith effort much more than the current efforts to tack the required settlement legislation onto other Congressional bills without benefit of a public hearing on the merits. Transparency is an important element for a healthy democracy – even for Indians.

Comments are not moderated. To report offensive comments, click here.

Post a Comment »
Find similar content

Firms mentioned

    
  • Kilpatrick Stockton
  • Kilpatrick Stockton

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Associated Press
  • U.S. Department of the Interior
  • Legal Times
  • Enron
  • American Indian Rights Fund
  • Associated Press
  • U.S. Department of the Interior
  • Legal Times
  • Enron
  • American Indian Rights Fund

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Donovan Criticizes Secret Payoff to Lopez Victims
    •      
  2. Court Officials Seek to Reform Process of Naming Acting Justices
    •      
  3. The 2013 Am Law 100
    •      
  4. Real Estate Lawyers Target Closing Vendors
    •      
  5. Law for Laymen
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

Taking the Reins of Legal Department Operations

In-House Law: Now in 3-D!

Simpson Helps Yahoo, Tumblr Connect for $1 Billion Deal

Kasowitz Benson Launches in Los Angeles

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Collaboration Is Key to Defending Cyberattacks

Stanford Law Builds on Role as Legal Tech Incubator

Prolific ADA Plaintiff Faces Nemesis in Harassment Suit

Ullyot Exit Closes Chapter for Facebook

Rothstein Bankruptcy Trustee Files New Reorganization Plan
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Fla. Bar Wants Disbarment for Former Judge
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Appellate Division To Roll Out Electronic Case Filing System

Court Limits Liability for Injury Or Death of One Invited To Help
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Court Officials Seek to Reform Process of Naming Acting Justices

NYC Defends Police Department's Use of Stop-and-Frisk

Immigrant Investor Program Gets Watchful Eye

Judge Orders Parties to Hire Neutral Expert to Probe Facebook

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Water Warriors: Local Governments Bring Pollution Suits
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Sanction Reversed; Filing of Sexually Explicit Chat OKd
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Lenders Win On Foreclosures
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Justices: Doc Interviews With Defense Are Attorney Work Product
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Law.com Network
  • ADVERTISE

law.com

  • Tour the New Site
  • Newswire
  • Special Reports
  • International News
  • Lists, Surveys & Rankings
  • Legal Blogs
  • Contact Us
  • Advertise
  • Site Map

alm national

  • The American Lawyer
  • The Am Law Litigation Daily
  • Corporate Counsel
  • Law Technology News
  • The National Law Journal

alm regional

  • Connecticut Law Tribune
  • Daily Business Review (FL)
  • Delaware Law Weekly
  • Daily Report (GA)
  • The Legal Intelligencer (PA)
  • New Jersey Law Journal
  • New York Law Journal
  • GC New York
  • The Recorder (CA)
  • Texas Lawyer
  • The Asian Lawyer
  • Focus Europe

directories

  • ALM Experts
  • LegalTech® Directory
  • In-House Law Departments at the Top 500 Companies
  • Top Rated Lawyers
  • The American Lawyer Top Rated Lawyers
  • The American Lawyer Legal Recruiter's Directory
  • Corporate Counsel Top Rated Lawyers
  • The National Law Journal Leadership Profiles
  • National Directory of Minority Attorneys
  • Go-To Law firms of the Top 500 Companies

books & newsletters

  • Best-Selling Books
  • Publication E-Alerts
  • Law Journal Newsletters
  • LawCatalog Store
  • Law Journal Press Online

research

  • ALM Legal Intelligence
  • Court Reporters
  • MA 3000
  • Verdict Search
  • ALM Experts
  • Legal Dictionary
  • Smart Litigator

events & conferences

  • ALM Events
  • LegalTech®
  • Virtual LegalTech®
  • Virtual Events
  • Webinars & Online Events
  • Insight Information

reprints

  • Reprints

online cle

  • CLE Center

career

  • Lawjobs
About ALM  |  About Law.com  |  Customer Support  |  Reprints  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms & Conditions |  ALM User License Agreement