ILNews

Small law firm sees faith in class-action suit pay off

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A federal judge appears likely to approve the largest class-action settlement ever to come out of a local court, and DeLaney & DeLaney, a small Indianapolis law firm that helped press the case, is poised to profit handsomely.

U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Walton Pratt in June granted preliminary approval to a deal under which WellPoint Inc. would pay $90 million to settle a lawsuit charging it undercompensated policyholders when it converted into a public company in 2001. The deal — submitted three days before a trial was set to begin — is up for final approval at an Oct. 25 hearing.

The plaintiffs have asked the judge to earmark one-third of the settlement, or $30 million, for attorney’s fees, though it isn’t clear how that would be divvied up among the six law firms representing plaintiffs.

It’s been quite an odyssey for all the plaintiffs’ attorneys. The case began seven years ago, and DeLaney & DeLaney jumped on board in 2008, when the case was transferred from Ohio.

The firm, which has just five attorneys, poured more than 2,400 hours into the case, working alongside some national heavyweights in class-action litigation.

“Every person who has worked here during the life of this case has worked on this case,” said Kathleen DeLaney, DeLaney & DeLaney’s managing partner. “It is that big a case. At certain times, we added personnel to work on this case. We had lots of weekends and late nights working on this case.”

Because it was a contingency-fee case, all that work would have been for naught had Indianapolis-based WellPoint prevailed at trial. But DeLaney said her firm thoroughly analyzed the risks and opportunities before jumping aboard.

At issue in the lawsuit were the terms of the 2001 conversion of WellPoint — then known as Anthem Inc. — from a policyholder-owned company to a publicly traded one. Plaintiffs had been planning to argue at trial that the insurer paid 700,000 policyholders in Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky and Connecticut $227 million to $448 million less than it should have.

While the $90 million settlement is just 40 percent of the low end of that range, WellPoint had contended it owed nothing. And even if plaintiffs had prevailed at trial, they faced the risk of having that verdict overturned on appeal after years of additional legal squabbling.

“These large risks strongly motivated class counsel to perform work of the highest quality and in appropriate quantity, in order to fulfill our fiduciary commitment to our clients and to lessen the chances of a disastrous loss,” plaintiffs’ attorneys said in their motion asking Pratt to approve the one-third contingency fee.

DeLaney believes the deal has strong support from class members. She noted that there were just three objections filed to the fee request, despite the hundreds of thousands of class members who could have done so.

“The bottom line is, this was the biggest case of my career so far,” said DeLaney, who graduated from law school in 1995 and entered private practice in 1997, after clerking two years for then-U.S. District Court Judge David Hamilton. “It was a very exciting case to be involved with. I am proud of the results we got for our class members.”

DeLaney started DeLaney & DeLaney in 2001 with her mother, Ann DeLaney, a former chairwoman of the Indiana Democratic Party. Her father, state Rep. Ed DeLaney, joined them after retiring as a partner at Barnes & Thornburg in 2003.

DeLaney & DeLaney, the only Indiana law firm representing the plaintiffs, was the primary point of contact for class members, “and, as the case progressed, had key roles in case strategy decisions,” according to a filing by attorneys for other firms representing plaintiffs. The filing noted that both Kathleen and Ed DeLaney were named to the team that was going to try the case before a jury.

Kathleen DeLaney isn’t saying what percentage of the spoils will go to her firm. The firm put in 6 percent of the nearly 41,000 hours that plaintiffs’ attorneys devoted to the case.

Had all the firms billed at their attorneys’ regular hourly rates, fees would have totaled $20 million, with more than $840,000 going to DeLaney & DeLaney. The Indianapolis firm bills at up to $450 an hour, a pittance compared with the more than $700 an hour billed by some out-of-state attorneys who represented plaintiffs.•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Have been seeing this wonderful physician for a few years and was one of his patients who told him about what we were being told at CVS. Multiple ones. This was a witch hunt and they shold be ashamed of how patients were treated. Most of all, CVS should be ashamed for what they put this physician through. So thankful he fought back. His office is no "pill mill'. He does drug testing multiple times a year and sees patients a minimum of four times a year.

  2. Brian W, I fear I have not been sufficiently entertaining to bring you back. Here is a real laugh track that just might do it. When one is grabbed by the scruff of his worldview and made to choose between his Confession and his profession ... it is a not a hard choice, given the Confession affects eternity. But then comes the hardship in this world. Imagine how often I hear taunts like yours ... "what, you could not even pass character and fitness after they let you sit and pass their bar exam ... dude, there must really be something wrong with you!" Even one of the Bishop's foremost courtiers said that, when explaining why the RCC refused to stand with me. You want entertaining? How about watching your personal economy crash while you have a wife and five kids to clothe and feed. And you can't because you cannot work, because those demanding you cast off your Confession to be allowed into "their" profession have all the control. And you know that they are wrong, dead wrong, and that even the professional code itself allows your Faithful stand, to wit: "A lawyer may refuse to comply with an obligation imposed by law upon a good faith belief that no valid obligation exists. The provisions of Rule 1.2(d) concerning a good faith challenge to the validity, scope, meaning or application of the law apply to challenges of legal regulation of the practice of law." YET YOU ARE A NONPERSON before the BLE, and will not be heard on your rights or their duties to the law -- you are under tyranny, not law. And so they win in this world, you lose, and you lose even your belief in the rule of law, and demoralization joins poverty, and very troubling thoughts impeaching self worth rush in to fill the void where your career once lived. Thoughts you did not think possible. You find yourself a failure ... in your profession, in your support of your family, in the mirror. And there is little to keep hope alive, because tyranny rules so firmly and none, not the church, not the NGO's, none truly give a damn. Not even a new court, who pay such lip service to justice and ancient role models. You want entertainment? Well if you are on the side of the courtiers running the system that has crushed me, as I suspect you are, then Orwell must be a real riot: "There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever." I never thought they would win, I always thought that at the end of the day the rule of law would prevail. Yes, the rule of man's law. Instead power prevailed, so many rules broken by the system to break me. It took years, but, finally, the end that Dr Bowman predicted is upon me, the end that she advised the BLE to take to break me. Ironically, that is the one thing in her far left of center report that the BLE (after stamping, in red ink, on Jan 22) is uninterested in, as that the BLE and ADA office that used the federal statute as a sword now refuses to even dialogue on her dire prediction as to my fate. "C'est la vie" Entertaining enough for you, status quo defender?

  3. Low energy. Next!

  4. Had William Pryor made such provocative statements as a candidate for the Indiana bar he could have been blackballed as I have documented elsewhere on this ezine. That would have solved this huuuge problem for the Left and abortion industry the good old boy (and even girl) Indiana way. Note that Diane Sykes could have made a huuge difference, but she chose to look away like most all jurists who should certainly recognize a blatantly unconstitutional system when filed on their docket. See footnotes 1 & 2 here: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-7th-circuit/1592921.html Sykes and Kanne could have applied a well established exception to Rooker Feldman, but instead seemingly decided that was not available to conservative whistleblowers, it would seem. Just a loss and two nice footnotes to numb the pain. A few short years later Sykes ruled the very opposite on the RF question, just as she had ruled the very opposite on RF a few short years before. Indy and the abortion industry wanted me on the ground ... they got it. Thank God Alabama is not so corrupted! MAGA!!!

  5. OK, take notice. Those wondering just how corrupt the Indiana system is can see the picture in this post. Attorney Donald James did not criticize any judges, he merely, it would seem, caused some clients to file against him and then ignored his own defense. James thus disrespected the system via ignoring all and was also ordered to reimburse the commission $525.88 for the costs of prosecuting the first case against him. Yes, nearly $526 for all the costs, the state having proved it all. Ouch, right? Now consider whistleblower and constitutionalist and citizen journalist Paul Ogden who criticized a judge, defended himself in such a professional fashion as to have half the case against him thrown out by the ISC and was then handed a career ending $10,000 bill as "half the costs" of the state crucifying him. http://www.theindianalawyer.com/ogden-quitting-law-citing-high-disciplinary-fine/PARAMS/article/35323 THE TAKEAWAY MESSAGE for any who have ears to hear ... resist Star Chamber and pay with your career ... welcome to the Indiana system of (cough) justice.

ADVERTISEMENT