IN RE: PET FOOD PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION - 100

Reviews
Shared by: Tim Stanley
Stats
views:
11
rating:
not rated
reviews:
0
posted:
4/15/2008
language:
English
pages:
0
IN RE: PET FOOD PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION Doc. 100 Case 1:07-cv-02867-NLH-AMD Document 100 Filed 12/07/2007 Page 1 of 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY IN RE Pet Foods Products Liability Litigation : : : : : Civil Action No. 07-2867 (NLH) MDL DOCKET NO. 1850 ALL CASES This matter having been brought before the Court by the filing of “Consent Order Regarding Organization of Plaintiffs’ Counsel” [99]; and The Court having ordered that all interested parties file motions for the appointment of lead and liaison counsel no later than September 5, 2007 [10]; and On September 26, 2007, the Court having heard oral argument on the three motions for the appointment of lead and liaison counsel that were filed by September 5, 20071; and Following that hearing, the Court having stayed the action for 90 days; and The Court having also denied without prejudice the motions to appoint interim lead counsel; but The Court having ordered that the parties were permitted to renew by letter their motions to appoint lead counsel no later than December 28, 2007; and It now appearing that the remaining applicants for lead counsel have agreed to act as co-lead counsel; and Three motions for the appointment of lead counsel were filed, but one motion was withdrawn at the hearing. See Docket Entry No. 77. 1 Dockets.Justia.com Case 1:07-cv-02867-NLH-AMD Document 100 Filed 12/07/2007 Page 2 of 2 It further appearing that no other motions for lead counsel have been filed; and The Court noting that the private ordering approach--where lawyers agree who should be lead class counsel--is a preferred method of appointing lead counsel, see Manual for Complex Litigation, Fourth, § 21.272; Third Circuit Task Force Report on Selection of Class Counsel, 74 TEMP . L. REV . 689, 740 (2001); Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY on this 7th day of December, 2007 ORDERED that any party show cause within ten (10) days of the date of this Order why the “Consent Order Regarding Organization of Plaintiffs’ Counsel” [99] should not be entered. s/ Noel L. Hillman At Camden, New Jersey NOEL L. HILLMAN, U.S.D.J. 2

Shared by: Tim Stanley
Other docs by Tim Stanley
Related docs