## Facts

- Thousands of federal and state product-liability suits were filed alleging injury from the prescription drug Vioxx (rofecoxib), developed and marketed by Merck & Co., Inc.
- Federal cases were centralized in MDL No. 1657 in the Eastern District of Louisiana to coordinate discovery and pretrial proceedings.
- A global settlement valued at $4.85 billion was implemented through a court-supervised claims program that distributed settlement proceeds to claimants.
- The court previously set the total “common benefit” attorneys’ fee attributable to work producing the settlement at 6.5% of the settlement value, totaling $315,250,000.
- The court appointed a Fee Allocation Committee (FAC) to collect evidence (including detailed submissions and presentations) and recommend how to distribute the common-benefit fee fund among qualifying plaintiffs’ counsel.
- After objections to the FAC recommendation, the court appointed a special master to review the record, conduct further proceedings, and provide an independent allocation recommendation.
- Multiple attorneys and firms objected to the recommended distribution, generally arguing their common-benefit contributions were undervalued.
- The court issued an order resolving objections and entering a final allocation of the common-benefit attorneys’ fee fund.

## Issues

1. Whether the MDL court had authority to supervise and allocate a previously fixed common-benefit attorneys’ fee fund among plaintiffs’ counsel.
2. What criteria and process should govern a fair allocation of a common-benefit fee fund in a large MDL associated with a court-supervised global settlement.
3. Whether objectors showed that the FAC and special master recommendations were unfair or sufficiently erroneous to require material reallocation.

## Decision

- The court reaffirmed its authority, in its supervisory role over the MDL and settlement, to allocate common-benefit attorneys’ fees among counsel whose work benefited the litigation as a whole.
- The court found the allocation process (FAC submissions and presentations, special master review, and judicial consideration of objections) adequate and fair.
- The court adopted the special master’s recommendations with limited modifications.
- The court overruled most objections and made only modest adjustments where warranted.
- The court entered a final order distributing the $315,250,000 common-benefit fee fund among qualifying attorneys and firms.

## Legal Principles

- An MDL court has inherent and equitable authority to supervise, set, and allocate common-benefit attorneys’ fees connected to litigation and settlement administration before it, including proceedings with quasi-class-action characteristics.
- Allocation of a common-benefit fund is an equitable determination based on a holistic assessment of relative contributions, including:
  - the amount and type of work performed (e.g., discovery, expert work, trials, motion practice, settlement efforts, administration);
  - the quality, significance, and impact of the work on the litigation’s outcome;
  - leadership roles, risk assumed, and resources committed.
- The court may rely on structured mechanisms—such as a fee allocation committee, detailed evidentiary submissions, hearings, and a special master—to build a record for fee allocation.
- Mathematical precision is not required; the allocation must be reasonable and supported by the record, and objectors bear the burden to demonstrate material unfairness or error.

## Conclusion

The court exercised equitable supervisory authority over MDL common-benefit fees and approved a final allocation of the $315.25 million fee fund, largely rejecting objections and making only limited adjustments after reviewing the FAC record and the special master’s recommendations.


In re Vioxx Prods. Liab. Litig., 802 F. Supp. 2d 740 (E.D. La. 2011)