Multiple sources report that the Hawaii Supreme Court heard arguments Tuesday over a lower court’s decision to carve $222 million out of the $4 billion Maui wildfire settlement to create a common benefit fund for attorneys. Four attorneys are appealing the ruling, arguing the circuit court lacked authority to establish the fund and that the process violated due process rights. The case has broader implications for how legal fees are handled in future disaster-related settlements in Hawaii.
- The $4 billion Maui wildfire settlement covers roughly 21,750 plaintiffs, though attorneys for victims noted it represents only a fraction of the estimated $12–$15 billion in total damages (Courthousenews)
- Maui Judge Peter Cahill’s June ruling capped attorney fees at 8% of settlement funds — well below the 25% normally permitted under Hawaii state law
- The $222 million Common Benefit Fund is reserved for Hawaii-based attorneys who contributed work benefiting all plaintiffs; out-of-state attorneys do not qualify (Alohastatedaily)
- Attorneys from Ranken & Shnider, the PACLAW Group, and San Diego-based Montegna & Thickstun are among those appealing Cahill’s ruling (Alohastatedaily)
- Appellants argue Cahill lacked authority to create the fund after the underlying cases were settled and dismissed, and that clients were shut out of the fee negotiation process
- Hawaii’s representative defended the coordinated fee ruling, warning that without it the process across thousands of claims would have created chaos
- Appellant Samuel Shnider argued the fee order could deter attorneys from taking on future disaster cases in Hawaii, jeopardizing access to justice
Sources
- Courthousenews: Hawaii high court grapples with $222M taken from Maui wildfire settlement
- Alohastatedaily: Aloha State Daily | Maui fire settlement back in court over lawyers’ fees
Share this article
