$726 Million Paid To Paula Marburger

If the Court were to reject the present settlement, it is possible that Range would not agree to an alternative settlement that includes an opt out provision; but even if Range did, it seems unlikely that a substantial percentage of class members would exercise their right to opt out, given that less than one percent of the class has registered an objection to the existing settlement terms. On balance, the Court's Girsh analysis counsels in favor of approving the Supplemental Settlement. " Plaintiff's Motion for Relief Under Rule 60. The objectors have suggested that more discovery is needed in order to properly prosecute the class claims, including depositions to test the sufficiency of Range's prior disclosures. Small Games of Chance License. Having fully considered the arguments of Class Counsel, the objectors, and Range Resources, the Court will not reject the Supplemental Settlement based upon the fact that it fails to accord class members an opportunity to opt out of the settlement. Citing a new affidavit from Ms. Whitten, Range now disclosed that it had undertaken a second, more time-consuming analysis of the MCF/MMBTU damages figure based upon an examination of royalties paid to each individual interest holder since 2011. Noting that the lion's share of discovery had been directed at the calculation of damages, Mr. Altomare rejected the idea that the class "must accept, without verification, the data already provided, " because this "would unreasonably restrict Plaintiffs to a calculation which simply replaces MMBTU with MCF volumes without the ability to question the underlying data. 6 million paid to paula marburger day. Third, the discovery in this case was sufficient to ensure a fair evaluation of the class's claims. 84, ¶1 at 3-4; ECF No. This issue originated with Mr. Rupert's observation that many of the billing entries that Mr. Altomare had initially submitted in support of his fee application appeared to mirror Mr. Rupert's own time entries, which Mr. Rupert had forwarded to Mr. Altomare for the purpose of seeking reimbursement from the common settlement fund. I estimate this task would require 4-6 employees working for more than two weeks, approximately 320 to 480 man hours, to identify, download, adjust and implement the new data files. Plaintiffs alleged, among other things, that: (a) Range has improperly calculated the [PPC] Cap by using MMBTUs (each, one million British Thermal Units) instead of MCFs (each, 1, 000 cubic feet) as the multiplier required by Section 3. Contemporaneous with that ruling, and as contemplated under the parties' agreement, Judge McLaughlin entered a separate order amending the class members' leases ("Order Amending Leases").

1. $726 million paid to paula marburger 2
2. $726 million paid to paula marburger farms
3. $726 million paid to paula marburger house
4. $726 million paid to paula marburger model
5. $726 million paid to paula marburger news

$726 Million Paid To Paula Marburger 2

Unfortunately, the Order Amending Leases contained a discrepancy that did not conform to the terms of the Original Settlement Agreement. These factors should not be applied in a "formulaic way" because each case is unique, "and in certain cases, one factor may outweigh the rest. " Insofar as the objectors would seek to litigate the other claims in the Motion to Enforce, there is a substantial risk that the costs of litigation may outweigh any potential recovery. In re Rite Aid Corp. 3d at 300 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). 75 million, or $437, 500), plus a percentage of the class members' royalties over the ensuing five-year period. Ehrheart v. $726 million paid to paula marburger house. 3d 590, 593 (3d Cir. Like the Original Settlement Agreement, the Supplemental Settlement Agreement contains two separate components.

$726 Million Paid To Paula Marburger Farms

For many of these same reasons, the Court concludes that Class Counsel's request for a prospective fee award based on a percentage of class members' future royalty payments is inappropriate and must be denied. The Bigley Objectors lodge similar objections and argue that Mr. Altomare should be awarded no fee at all. Besides having an opportunity to observe Ms. Whitten directly in her capacity as a witness, the Court notes Mr. Rupert's acknowledgement that he had also communicated directly with Ms. Whitten on occasion to amicably resolve certain issues or disputes concerning the class members' royalty payments. In fact, the record shows that this dialogue was ongoing even before Class Counsel filed the Motion to Enforce, as various issues were hashed out between Mr. Altomare and Range's agents on an ad hoc basis, often with the input of Mr. Rupert. 6 million paid to paula marburger farms. The remainder of Class Counsel's efforts were spent investigating claims that Mr. Altomare ultimately found to be meritless, unactionable, or otherwise not worth pursuing when weighed against the prospect of a substantial settlement.

$726 Million Paid To Paula Marburger House

Class Counsel's redacted exemplar of the raw data shows that the information amounted to some 2, 873 printed pages. I am less concerned with who is responsible for making the unwarranted revision as I am with correcting this discrepancy of record and obtaining an accounting. Rule 23(e)(1)(B) requires, in relevant part, that the court "direct notice in a reasonable manner to all class members who would be bound by the proposal[. ]" 160-1 at 2, Two of these objectors - Wagers Apple Crest Orchards, LLC and Jill Craig - are lessors under leases that were granted in 2013, and are not subject to the Original Settlement Agreement. While the Court acknowledges this reality, the Court does not view it as fatal to approval of the proposed settlement. Iii) Double-charging processing fees ("PHI-Proc Fee") associated with natural gas liquids (NGLs). Sometime later, Mr. Rupert concluded that the PPC cap was not being consistently applied, even on an MMBTU basis, even though it appeared from the codes on Range's statements that the cap was being applied. For these reasons, Mr. Altomare's Application for Supplemental Attorney Fees will be granted to the extent that he will be awarded $360, 000 from the common settlement fund. In re NFL Players Concussion Injury Litig., 821 F. 3d at 436. The Court also finds that negotiation of the Supplemental Settlement occurred at arms' length. Iv) Failing to adhere to minimum royalty provisions in some Class members' leases. Here, the proposed relief consists of two components.

$726 Million Paid To Paula Marburger Model

Range would effectuate the recordation of the Court's Order effectuating the lease amendments. Altomare's initial misapplication of the wet shale PPC cap was a computational oversight that was cured in the normal course of informal discovery. 80 cap is being calculated against MMBTU rather than MCF as required... " ECF No. Here again, the Court finds that these factors support the fairness and adequacy of the settlement. He also denied that his actions in negotiating the Supplemental Settlement were self-serving, stating: There can be no question that the Motion for Enforcement of the original settlement agreement [Doc. A recitation of the relevant procedural history follows. The gravamen of Plaintiffs' complaint was their claim that Range Resources had unlawfully reduced their royalty payments under the subject leases by deducting certain post-production costs (hereafter, "PPC") that Range had incurred in the process of bringing gas and oil products to market. Negotiations Occurred at Arms' Length. C. The Parties' Joint Motion for Approval of the Supplemental Settlement. Utilizing an hourly billing rate of $250 and applying a multiplier of 5.

$726 Million Paid To Paula Marburger News

These considerations weigh in favor of approving the settlement terms. " In short, any risk of nonpayment related to the MCF/MMBTU issue was largely exacerbated by Class Counsel himself. Based upon all of the foregoing considerations, the Court finds by a preponderance of evidence that the Supplemental Settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable. 2010), and a settlement should be accorded an initial presumption of fairness where (1) the settlement negotiations occurred at arm's length; (2) there was sufficient discovery; (3) the proponents of the settlement are experienced in similar litigation; and (4) only a small fraction of the class objected. The Supplemental Settlement therefore provides for a cash payment to class members who previously received allegedly deficient royalty payments associated with shale gas production. Thus, none of the "losing" class members have objected, despite being sent notices of the Supplemental Settlement. Ms. Whitten manages Range Resource's Land Administration Department, which maintains the internal computer files that pertain to the payment of royalties. A certain amount of imprecision is therefore permitted. On July 26, 2019, Range Resources filed objections to the portion of Class Counsel's fee request associated with the prospective royalty payments. Paragraph 3 of the Order approving settlement [attached Doc 83] approves the terms set forth in the Second Amended Settlement Agreement [attached Doc 71-1], page 8 of which requires that MCF should be used.

The Court first considers whether it should accord an initial presumption of fairness to the Supplemental Settlement. For the reasons that follow, the Joint Motion for Approval of Supplemental Agreement and Stipulation of Settlement will be granted. Apply For... Bingo License. I frankly missed this discrepancy, trusting that the order submitted would be the same as the proposed order we had jointly submitted at [see Doc 71-1 at Ex "D"]. The Court also recognizes that class members were themselves on constructive notice of the MMBTU issue, in that the March 17, 2011 Order Amending Leases was a matter of public record and Range's computation of shale gas royalties based on MMBTUs was disclosed on its monthly royalty statements. During the four-month period of formal discovery, Class Counsel served multiple requests for documents and received voluminous electronic data from Range Resources, as well as a detailed accounting of Range's own damages calculations, which Mr. Altomare was able to cross-check against his own computations. Substantively, discovery occurred on a granular level as counsel delved into the minutiae of arcane and highly technical accounting issues. Prospectively, the Amended Order Amending Leases will potentially benefit any class member who may come to hold an interest in a shale gas well. In addition, the Plaintiffs requested an evidentiary hearing for the purpose of allowing the Court to consider the propriety of a cease and desist order, monetary compensation, punitive sanctions, and other forms of relief. Several months later, the parties filed their Joint Motion for Approval of the Supplemental Agreement and Stipulation of Settlement (hereafter, "Supplemental Settlement" or "Supplemental Settlement Agreement").

Mon, 20 May 2024 19:59:08 +0000