Jolly et al v. Chi et al

Filing 52

ORDER granting as modified 49 & 51 Joint Motion to approve proposed settlement agreement and related papers. The proposed deal (with one change) is fair, reasonable, and adequate. The change: The Court does not approve Article 7 on confidentialit y, and it is severed from the agreement, which the proposal allows to be done with unenforceable terms. The Court will have the Clerk file the lawyers' bill as part of the record under seal, 38 . The parties should file a joint status report, including a sealed addendum listing opt-ins and payments by 11/15/2017. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 6/8/2017. (jak)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
WESTERN DIVISION
ALISON JOLLY and MATTHEW JOHNSON,
Individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated

v.

PLAINTIFFS

No. 4:16-cv-9-DPM

LULU CHI; JACOB CHI; and
JANSEN CHI

DEFENDANTS
ORDER

1. The Court appreciates the parties' continuing efforts to resolve their

differences. The joint motion to approve their proposed settlement agreement
and related papers, Ng 49 & 51, is granted as modified.
2.

The proposed deal (with one change) is fair, reasonable, and

adequate considering all the material circumstances.

In re Flight

Transportation Corp. Securities Litigation, 730 F.2d 1128, 1135 (8th Cir. 1984)

(Richard S. Arnold, J.). Jolly and Johnson will get what they believe they're
owed; the lawyers will get a reasonable fee for their work on the case; and
any other former employee who opts in will get paid, with a reasonable slice
going to the lawyers. The change: the Court does not approve Article 7 on
confidentiality, and it is severed from the agreement, which the proposal
allows to be done with unenforceable terms. NQ 49-1

at~

8.3. The public, in

general, and potential members of the settlement group, in particular, are
entitled to know all the terms of the deal. NQ 70 in Delock v. Securitas Security

Services USA, Inc., No. 4:11-cv-520-DPM.
3. Two loose ends.
First, Jolly and Johnson provided their lawyers' bill to the Court for inchambers review rather than filing it under seal. NQ 38. The Court has relied
on the bill in evaluating the reasonableness of the fee part of the proposed
deal. So the bill needs to be in the record. The Court will have the Clerk file
it under seal.
Second, when the parties file notice of consummation in a couple of
weeks, the Court will dismiss with prejudice (as requested) but retain
jurisdiction until 1December2017 to resolve any issues that may arise during
administration of the settlement group. The parties should file a joint status
report, including a sealed addendum listing opt-ins and payments, by 15
November 2017.
So Ordered.

P'

D.P. Marshall Jr.
United States District Judge