Free Order - District Court of California - California

Case 3:07-cv-02777-JSW

Document 16

Filed 11/07/2007

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 9 10 PAUL MEOLA, et al., Plaintiffs, v. AXA FINANCIAL, INC., et al., Defendants AND RELATED CASES / On October 5, 2007, Plaintiff Paul Meola filed a motion for the appointment of lead 17 counsel in this case, and in the consolidated cases as set forth in the caption. That motion is set 18 for hearing on November 30, 2007. 19 Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(g)(2), a "court may designate interim 20 counsel to act on behalf of the putative class before determining whether to certify the action as 21 a class action." When appointing interim class counsel, a court must find that the applicant is 22 adequate under Rule 23(g)(1)(B) and (C). Rule 23(g)(1)(B), in turn, requires that "[a]n attorney 23 appointed to serve as class counsel must fairly and adequately represent the interests of the 24 class." Rule 23(g)(1)(C), requires that: 25 26 27 28 (i) the court must consider: · the work counsel has done in identifying or investigating potential claims in the action, · counsel's experience in handling class actions, other complex litigation, and claims of the type asserted in the action, · counsel's knowledge of the applicable law, and · the resources counsel will commit to representing the class; (ii) may consider any other matter pertinent to counsel's ability to fairly and adequately represent the interests of the class; ORDER REQUIRING SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING ON MOTION FOR APPOINTMENT OF LEAD COUNSEL No. C 06-04291 JSW (Consolidated with 07-1858, 07-2777, and 07-4368) IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16

Case 3:07-cv-02777-JSW

Document 16

Filed 11/07/2007

Page 2 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

(iii) may direct potential class counsel to provide information on any subject pertinent to the appointment and to propose terms for attorney fees and nontaxable costs; and (iv) may make further orders in connection with the appointment. Although Plaintiffs' motion addresses counsel's experience with class actions, including class actions involving the issues raised by this case, it does not fully address the factors this Court must consider under Rule 23(g)(1)(B)(I). In addition, the Court requests additional information from Plaintiffs about their experience with cases raising claims like those raised in this case. Therefore, Plaintiffs are HEREBY ORDERED to submit a supplemental brief that addresses these issues by no later than November 16, 2007. The Court shall file this Order in each of the consolidated cases. IT IS SO ORDERED.

United States District Court

11
For the Northern District of California

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 Dated: November 7, 2007 JEFFREY S. WHITE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE