From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Hydroxycut Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation

United States District Court, S.D. California
Aug 31, 2010
CASE NO. 09MD2087-BTM (AJB) (S.D. Cal. Aug. 31, 2010)

Opinion

CASE NO. 09MD2087-BTM (AJB).

August 31, 2010


ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO INTERVENE


On February 12, 2010, pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 24(a) and La.Rev.Stat. § 37:218, attorneys and entities Jeffrey P. Berniard, Berniard Law Firm, Madro Bandaries, Madro Bandaries PLC, Gregory P. DiLeo, and Jennifer B. Eagan filed a Motion to Intervene [docket entry 82] ("Motion"). The motion was set for hearing on July 23, 2010. No opposition or response to the Motion was filed. The matter was deemed suitable for determination without oral argument and was submitted on the papers.

Upon consideration of the Motion and relevant authority, the Motion is hereby GRANTED. Louisiana courts have consistently recognized the right of the discharged attorney to enforce his claim for fees by means of intervention in the suit in which the attorney provided service. "Also recognized has been the right of a discharged attorney to enforce his properly perfected claim for a contracted fee under La.Rev.Stat. § 37:218 not only against his former client, but also against the opposing party in the suit filed by his former client." Simmons v. Chambliss, 852 So. 2d 1237, 1239 (La. App. 2003); see also Oubre v. Lousiana Citizens Fair Plan, 8 So. 3d 99,102 (La. App. 2009).

Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that Jeffrey P. Berniard, Berniard Law Firm, Madro Bandaries, Madro Bandaries PLC, Gregory P. DiLeo, and Jennifer B. Eagan shall be named as plaintiffs in intervention for purposes of enforcing their claims for attorneys fees in this case.

Any party who may oppose the right to or amount of fees, however, shall be entitled to a hearing upon request. See Robichaux v. Cade, 357 So. 2d 849, 852 (La. App. 1978).

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

In re Hydroxycut Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation

United States District Court, S.D. California
Aug 31, 2010
CASE NO. 09MD2087-BTM (AJB) (S.D. Cal. Aug. 31, 2010)
Case details for

In re Hydroxycut Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation

Case Details

Full title:IN RE HYDROXYCUT MARKETING AND SALES PRACTICES LITIGATION

Court:United States District Court, S.D. California

Date published: Aug 31, 2010

Citations

CASE NO. 09MD2087-BTM (AJB) (S.D. Cal. Aug. 31, 2010)