United States Sixth Circuit

In a class action lawsuit by the neighbors of a steel mill owned by United States Steel Corporation, district court's approval of a settlement is affirmed for the most part where: 1) the district court did not abuse its discretion in approving the release of the continuing-nuisance claims as the release is not far-reaching and it is not unfair, unreasonable or inadequate; 2) class-member awards of $300 is not unconscionably low as this objection is based on the misconception that the agreement releases all future tort claims; and 3) district court's approval of the attorney's fees award is vacated and remanded for further explanation. Finally, district court did not err by corralling the extent of an attorney's involvement in the case and the rest of his objections are rejected.

Appellate Information

• Argued 08/04/2009
• Decided 09/22/2009
• Published 09/22/2009

Judges

• Before CLAY and SUTTON, Circuit Judges; THAPAR, District Judge.

Court

• United States Sixth Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• ARGUED:James P. Murphy, Berry Moorman P.C., Detroit, Michigan, for Appellants. J. Van Carson, Squire, Sanders & Dempsey L.L.P., Cleveland, Ohio, Peter W. Macuga, II, Macuga, Liddle & Dubin, Detroit, Michigan, for Appellees. Donnelly W. Hadden, Donnelly W. Hadden, P.C., Ann Arbor, Michigan, for Movants ON BRIEF:James P. Murphy, Richard R. Zmijewski, Sr., Berry Moorman P .C., Detroit, Michigan, for Appellants. J. Van Carson, Lianne Mantione, John D. Lazzaretti, Squire, Sanders & Dempsey L.L.P., Cleveland, Ohio, Peter W. Macuga, II, Macuga, Liddle & Dubin, Detroit, Michigan, Jason J. Thompson, Sommers Schwartz, Southfield, Michigan, William J. McKim, United States Steel Corporation Law Department, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Jack O. Kalmink, Clark Hill PLC, Detroit, Michigan, for Appellees. Donnelly W. Hadden, Donnelly W. Hadden, P.C., Ann Arbor, Michigan, for Movants.