The hefty rulings leading to sizeable earnings for plaintiffs’ attorneys might become a new routine component in the realm of corporate litigation. This perspective was considered by the head of the Delaware Supreme Court during the arguments conducted last week. However, the court itself appeared reluctant about disrupting the established Delaware procedure for assigning fee awards.
The staggering fee award related to the Dell deal is cited as the second-largest in court history. The justices debated the prudence of altering the factors impacting the determination of the fee awards.
“I wonder a bit whether we’re in a different world here where some of these judgments that are occurring are pretty eye-popping,” remarked Chief Justice Collins J. Seitz Jr., during the oral complaint over a hedge fund’s objection on a $267 million fee award. This fee was for attorneys who brokered a historical $1 billion settlement with Dell Technologies Inc.
From the considerations that ensued, it was evident that the court was hesitant to disrupt the established processes around fee award determinations. While acknowledging the increasingly substantial lawsuit judgements, the court showed skepticism over significant adjustments to the prevailing fee award procedures.
This closing indicates the ongoing critical debates around legal fee structures and the broader effects these large-scale financial judgements may have on corporate litigation.
Full details available at: Bloomberg Law