Judge Signs Off on Fees in $1.5B Syngenta Corn Settlement
Plaintiffs' attorney Mikal Watts plans to appeal U.S. District Judge John Lungstrum's order, which largely approved a special master's recommendation on how to dole out $503 million in legal fees.
January 03, 2019 at 06:11 PM
4 minute read
A federal judge in Kansas has largely signed off on a special master's recommendation on how to dole out $503 million in legal fees as part of a $1.5 billion settlement with Syngenta over genetically modified corn.
In a Dec. 31 order, U.S. District Judge John Lungstrum rejected arguments from Texas plaintiffs lawyer Mikal Watts, who has sought up to $150 million in fees. Watts was among more than a dozen lawyers who raised concerns at a hearing last month about the special master's report, which divvied up fees to about 400 law firms.
In an interview, Watts said he planned to appeal. A recent trend in ”hybrid” multidistrict litigation proceedings — those that include both individual cases with contingency fee contracts and class actions – raise issues that the appellate courts will have to address, he said.
“This may well be the last hybrid case that corporate America can ever settle,” he said. “People hired by private individual clients are not going to put their client into hybrid settlement deals where 88 percent of their fee is absconded by lawyers who the clients don't know.”
Lungstrum agreed with the special master that the bulk of the fee award should go to common benefit fees, with nearly half the award going to lead plaintiffs lawyers in the multidistrict litigation, in Kansas, who “easily contributed the most to the class settlement.” Smaller percentages of the fee award, he wrote, should go to lawyers in Minnesota state court and Illinois federal court who did work that benefited the class.
“The successful resolution of this litigation was most driven by the successes achieved in the Kansas MDL (including a favorable trial verdict and the specter of additional class trials to come) and the massive consolidated action in Minnesota; Illinois provided an additional front, but that front clearly ranked third in the pecking order,” he wrote.
The settlement, approved in an order last month, resolved lawsuits alleging that Syngenta sold genetically modified corn seed that China refused to import, causing about 600,000 farmers and other producers to lose billions of dollars.
In her Nov. 21 report, the special master, Ellen Reisman of Reisman Karron Greene in Washington, D.C., recommended that 50 percent of the fees should go to 95 law firms in the multidistrict litigation in Kansas. Another 24 percent should go to lawyers with Minnesota cases, 16 percent to those in Illinois, and 10 percent to attorneys with individual clients.
The special master also had recommended capping contingency fees at 10 percent for a fourth group: lawyers with individual clients. Lungstrum supported that move but, in order to impose such a cap, concluded that he would have to raise the percentage of fees for that group from 10 percent to 12 percent, resulting in a corresponding reduction in common benefit fees. To accommodate the increase, Lungstrum reduced the common benefit pools: Kansas to 49 percent, Minnesota to 23.5 percent and Illinois to 15.5 percent.
At a Dec. 17 hearing, lawyers with individual clients raised concerns that the report failed to acknowledge the work they did.
A key voice in that camp was Watts, of Watts Guerra in San Antonio, who, along with 330 other firms, represented 57,000 farmers with individual contingency fee contracts. Reisman, in her report, shot down his initial request for $150 million in fees. Watts objected to her report, but lead plaintiffs attorneys in Kansas estimated that Watts Guerra stood to earn $52 million, plus $12.8 million in expenses, under the report's allocation.
This week, Lungstrum rejected various arguments from Watts, who called his order “unprecedented.”
He said Lungstrum should not have relied on a 2018 fee sharing agreement that excluded him and other lawyers with individual clients. And he challenged the 10 percent cap on contingency fees. But his primary concern was the judge's authority to regulate attorney fees governed by contingency fee contracts.
“There is no way in future torts that any lawyer is going to subject himself and his clients to a hybrid deal if this is the law of the land,” he said.
Lungstrum, however, noted that attorneys with individual clients could submit requests by Jan. 18 for expenses or common benefit work, in addition to their contingency fees.
Lungstrum also approved $48.8 million in expenses and nearly $2.8 million in service awards to class representatives. U.S. District Judge David Herndon of the Southern District of Illinois and Minnesota Fourth Judicial District Judge Laurie Miller signed off on Lungstrum's order.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All12-Partner Team 'Surprises' Atlanta Firm’s Leaders With Exit to Launch New Reed Smith Office
4 minute readMorgan Lewis Shutters Shenzhen Office Less Than Two Years After Launch
After Breakaway From FisherBroyles, Pierson Ferdinand Bills $75M in First Year
5 minute readJudge Rejects Walgreens' Contractual Dispute Against Founder's Family Member
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'A Death Sentence for TikTok'?: Litigators and Experts Weigh Impact of Potential Ban on Creators and Data Privacy
- 2Bribery Case Against Former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin Is Dropped
- 3‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
- 4State Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
- 5Invoking Trump, AG Bonta Reminds Lawyers of Duties to Noncitizens in Plea Dealing
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250