Off v. Ross, No. 3468-VCP (Del. Ch., Dec. 10, 2009), read opinion here. The Court of Chancery’s prior decision in this case was highlighted here. This short decision involves a renewed application for attorneys’ fees in connection with the settlement of a derivative and class action. The first request for fees last year was denied (see link above) based on the Court’s concern that such an award at that time might interfere with a related pending action in New York. Now that the related New York case has settled, a renewed application for fees was submitted. This time the Court granted the application, based on the familiar factors that are discussed by the Court, though the amount granted was substantially discounted compared to the requested amount of fees. The Court explained that it was using as a lodestar the number of hours recorded by counsel multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate, plus a modest "multiplier", as opposed to a percentage of a common fund because the monetary benefit achieved was not readily quantifiable.