The attorneys who negotiated a $700 million settlement with Google over its Google Play Store practices are now seeking a significant payday of their own—$85 million in legal fees. The request, which was recently filed in federal court in San Francisco, will now face judicial scrutiny as part of the final settlement approval process.
The Settlement at a Glance
The underlying litigation accused Google of maintaining a monopoly over Android app distribution and charging developers unfair fees for in-app purchases through the Google Play billing system. According to the lawsuit, Google’s policies discouraged alternative app distribution methods, leaving consumers with fewer options and higher prices.
After more than three years of litigation, Google agreed in late 2023 to a $700 million settlement. Under the terms of the deal:
- $630 million will be distributed to consumers who purchased apps or made in-app transactions between August 16, 2016 and September 30, 2023.
- $70 million will go to a fund managed by all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, which were also involved in the case.
- Google has agreed to make policy changes that will give app developers more freedom to communicate with consumers about alternative payment options and will make sideloading (downloading apps outside of the Play Store) easier for users.
Consumers are expected to receive a minimum payment of $2 each, with higher payouts for those who spent more money on Google Play purchases during the relevant period.
The Lawyers’ Request
The law firms Bartlit Beck and Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer, which served as co-lead counsel, argue that their $85 million request is fair given the scope of their work. According to court filings, the attorneys dedicated nearly 100,000 hours to the case, coordinating with dozens of state attorneys general, conducting extensive discovery, and preparing for trial before reaching a settlement.
The requested fee represents roughly 13.5% of the $630 million consumer fund—a figure that falls within the typical range for complex class-action cases. The attorneys also noted that they took on the case on a contingency basis, assuming significant risk with no guarantee of recovery.
“Given the complexity of the case and the excellent result achieved for consumers nationwide, the requested award is justified,” the lawyers wrote in their motion.
Judge’s Role and Possible Hurdles
The case is pending before U.S. District Judge James Donato of the Northern District of California. Judge Donato must still approve the overall settlement, including the requested attorneys’ fees.
During earlier proceedings, the judge signaled he would carefully examine whether the settlement adequately protects consumers and provides meaningful relief. His review will include:
- Evaluating whether the fee request is reasonable compared to the size of the settlement and the benefit to the class.
- Considering any objections from consumers, who have the right to challenge the deal or the attorneys’ compensation.
- Assessing the value of the non-monetary relief Google has agreed to provide, such as its commitments to modify its Play Store practices.
At this stage, none of the states involved have objected to the $85 million fee request, though objections could still be filed by class members before the final approval hearing.
Why This Matters
This case is one of several antitrust battles Big Tech has faced over the control of its app stores. Both Google and Apple have been accused of limiting competition and imposing high transaction fees on developers, a practice critics argue inflates prices for consumers.
The Google settlement could set an important precedent for how tech companies manage their app ecosystems going forward. If approved, the deal will force Google to open the door to more consumer choice and competition, which could have ripple effects across the industry.
For the plaintiffs’ attorneys, the case also highlights the significant financial rewards—and risks—of major antitrust litigation. Large class actions often involve years of work, massive document discovery, and complex economic analysis. Fee awards are meant to compensate lawyers not only for their time but also for the uncertainty they face in taking on such cases.
What Happens Next
The next step is for Judge Donato to consider whether the settlement, including the fee request, meets the legal standard of being “fair, reasonable, and adequate.” A final approval hearing will be scheduled, at which time objections from consumers will be heard.
If the settlement is approved as proposed, distribution of the funds could begin in 2025, providing long-awaited payments to millions of Google Play users.
Key Case Details
- Case Name: In re Google Play Consumer Antitrust Litigation
- Court: U.S. District Court, Northern District of California
- Case Number: 3:20-cv-05761-JD
- Lead Plaintiffs’ Counsel: Karma Giulianelli (Bartlit Beck) and Hae Sung Nam (Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer)
- Defense Counsel: Brian Rocca (Morgan, Lewis & Bockius) and Glenn Pomerantz (Munger, Tolles & Olson)
JDJournal Insight: This case is a significant moment for antitrust enforcement in the tech sector. While $85 million is a substantial fee request, courts often approve similar percentages in class actions of this magnitude, particularly where lawyers invest years of work without guaranteed payment. The outcome will be closely watched not only by consumer advocates and app developers but also by other tech companies facing similar lawsuits.
Looking for your next big legal career move? Explore thousands of exclusive legal jobs on LawCrossing—the most comprehensive legal job board in the country. Whether you’re interested in antitrust law, class actions, or tech litigation, LawCrossing can help you find the perfect opportunity. Start your search today and take the next step in your legal career!
