McDowell v. Pluto Acquisition Opco, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN
SOUTHERN DIVISION
VIDAL MCDOWELL,
Plaintiff,
v.
PLUTO ACQUISITION OPCO, LLC,
Defendant.
Case No. 23-cv-12827
Honorable Robert J. White
ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR
ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS, SERVICE AWARD/GENERAL
RELEASE PAYMENT TO CLASS REPRESENTATIVE AND PAYMENT
TO SETTLEMENT ADMINISTRATOR
THIS MATTER came before the Court on October 20, 2025, upon Plaintiff’s
Unopposed Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs, Service Award/General Release
Payment to Class Representative and Payment to Settlement Administrator. (ECF
No. 46). Having considered the Motion, all papers and proceedings held herein,
having reviewed the record, including Class Counsel’s Declaration (ECF No. 47-2),
and heard counsel’s arguments in support thereof, the Court finds:
1. The Award reasonably compensates Class Counsel for the value
obtained for the Settlement Classes. The Settlement resulted in a non-reversionary
common fund of $2,400,000.00. The requested percentage of the Settlement Fund,
Case 2:23-cv-12827-RJW-APP ECF No. 50, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/27/25 Page 1 of 4

2
one third, is well within reason and is consistent with the attorneys’ fees typically
awarded by Sixth Circuit district courts, including this Court, in similar FCRA class
actions.
2. The Award is supported by a lodestar cross check. Class Counsel’s
lodestar rate of $750.00 is reasonable, as is the number of hours expended in the
litigation. The multiplier of 3.55 is reasonable and recognized as such in this district.
3. Class Counsel took this action on a contingency fee basis, as well as the
risks associated with class action contingency fee litigation. To date, Class Counsel
has not received any compensation for his efforts, and Class Counsel is entitled to
be compensated for the work performed on behalf of the Settlement Classes.
4. The public interest is furthered by compensating attorneys that
undertake significant risk to vindicate legal rights that otherwise may go unasserted.
This supports the requested fee award.
5. The complexity of the action also supports the requested fee award.
Class action lawsuits are inherently complex, and the FCRA provisions
underpinning the alleged violations are infrequently litigated. This supports the
requested fee award.
6. Class Counsel, Morgan & Morgan P.A. and Consumer Litigation
Associates PLLC are skilled and experienced FCRA litigators, nationally recognized
Case 2:23-cv-12827-RJW-APP ECF No. 50, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/27/25 Page 2 of 4

3
for their accomplishments asserting consumers’ FCRA rights. This supports the
requested fee award.
7. The Court has reviewed the expenses and costs incurred in this
litigation and finds them all to be reasonable.
8. The Court finds the Class Representative, Plaintiff Mr. Vidal
McDowell, has performed a great service to the Settlement Classes and furthered the
public’s interest in asserting FCRA rights. Without Mr. McDowell, there would be
no settlement. His selflessness and service should be rewarded. The Court approves
a five-thousand-dollar ($5,000.00) service award for Mr. McDowell.
9. The Court also finds a payment in the amount of $10,000.00 to the
Settlement Administrator, Apex, to be appropriate.
10. Finally, the Court has reviewed Class Counsel’s Declaration (ECF No.
48) and finds the expenses and costs incurred in the litigation to be reasonable.
CONCLUSION
Plaintiff’s Motion is GRANTED.
(1) The Court award Class Counsel attorney’s fees in the amount of
$800,000.00 and for reimbursement of $14,958.00 for costs and expenses incurred
in the litigation.
(2) The Court approves payment of $10,000.00 to the Settlement
Administrator; and
Case 2:23-cv-12827-RJW-APP ECF No. 50, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/27/25 Page 3 of 4

4
(3) The Court awards Plaintiff, Mr. Vidal McDowell, $5,000.00 for his
service to the Settlement Classes and as compensation for executing a
general release of claims.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: October 27, 2025 s/Robert J. White
Robert J. White
United States District Judge
Case 2:23-cv-12827-RJW-APP ECF No. 50, PageID.<pageID> Filed 10/27/25 Page 4 of 4