In re Bank of New York Mellon Corp. Forex Transactions Litigation, 148 F. Supp. 3d 303

Following unsealing of qui tam suits, allegations arose that BNYM overcharged custodial clients for foreign exchange services, spawning multiple lawsuits including a securities class action that settled for $180 million.
The Court appointed the State of Oregon (two public funds) as lead plaintiffs under the PSLRA and approved Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossman LLP (BLBG) as lead counsel; Stoll Berne also represented Oregon and Saxena-White represented other named plaintiffs.
Lead counsel sought $45 million in attorneys’ fees (25% of the $180M fund) and $1,616,575.69 in expenses, based on a reported lodestar of $46.8 million (118,867 hours at a $394 blended rate) and a 0.96 multiplier.
Oregon submitted a declaration that it had negotiated fee agreements allowing up to 25% and that it fully supported the fee request; lead counsel relied on that agreement initially but later treated it as one relevant factor among others.
The Court considered pay-to-play concerns because BLBG and Stoll Berne (as firms and through some individuals) made campaign contributions to Oregon officials who oversee public funds, but found no evidence undermining the integrity of counsel selection.
Applying the Goldberger factors and the lodestar method, the Court concluded the hours, blended rate, and multiplier were reasonable and granted the fee and expense awards, noting only that different conduct regarding political contributions would have been preferable.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the requested $45M (25%) fee is reasonable from the common fund	Lead counsel: lodestar $46.8M supports fee; multiplier 0.96; fee agreements and Oregon’s endorsement confirm reasonableness	Defendants: no economic interest in fee allocation and thus no opposition	Court: Granted fee—lodestar, hours, blended rate, and multiplier are reasonable under Goldberger factors
Weight to give PSLRA-era ex ante fee agreement and lead plaintiff endorsement	Lead counsel: ex ante fee agreement and Oregon’s support are relevant and initially cited for presumptive reasonableness	Opposing parties: argued the court is not bound by such agreements; pay-to-play concerns may undermine presumptions	Court: Did not rely on presumption; treated agreement/support as relevant but unnecessary to result—Goldberger factors suffice
Whether campaign contributions by counsel created a conflict or required fee reduction	Plaintiffs: asserted selection process was supervised by deputy attorney general and not influenced by contributions	Concerned parties: raised pay-to-play appearance and potential conflict undermining legitimacy of fee agreements	Court: Not persuaded there was evidence of corrupt influence; raised concern but found no basis to deny or reduce fee on that ground
Reimbursement of litigation expenses ($1.6M)	Lead counsel: expenses were reasonable and should be reimbursed	No opposition material from defendants	Court: Expenses reimbursed as requested

Goldberger v. Integrated Res., Inc., 209 F.3d 43 (2d Cir. 2000) (articulates lodestar approach and six-factor test for common-fund fee awards)
In re Cendant Corp. Litig., 264 F.3d 201 (3d Cir. 2001) (presumption of reasonableness for fee agreements negotiated by properly selected PSLRA lead plaintiffs)
In re AT&T Corp., 455 F.3d 160 (3d Cir. 2006) (cautions against overweighing Cendant presumption and emphasizes court’s fiduciary role to absent class members)
In re Nortel Networks Corp. Sec. Litig., 539 F.3d 129 (2d Cir. 2008) (addresses treatment of fee agreements under PSLRA in the Second Circuit)
McDaniel v. County of Schenectady, 595 F.3d 411 (2d Cir. 2010) (district courts have broad discretion in awarding fees)
Ognibene v. Parkes, 671 F.3d 174 (2d Cir. 2011) (recognizes importance of limiting appearances of impropriety in political contributions involving government business)