David J. Keegan v. American Honda Motor Co Inc et al

Filing 172

FINAL JUDGMENT by Judge Margaret M. Morrow (See document for specific details). (ir)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

Michael A. Caddell (State Bar No. 249469)
[e-mail]
Cynthia B. Chapman (State Bar No. 164471)
Cory S. Fein (State Bar No. 250758)
CADDELL & CHAPMAN
1331 Lamar, Suite 1070
Houston TX 77010-3027
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]
Payam Shahian (SBN 228406)
[e-mail]
STRATEGIC LEGAL PRACTICES, APC
1875 Century Park East, Suite 700
Los Angeles CA 90067
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: [phone]

12
13

[Additional attorneys listed below signature line]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA—WESTERN DIVISION
DAVID J. KEEGAN, LUIS
GARCIA, ERIC ELLIS, CHARLES
WRIGHT, BETTY KOLSTAD,
CAROL HINKLE, AND
JONATHAN ZDEB, individually,
and on behalf of a class of similarly
situated individuals,

22
23
24
25
26

Case No. 2:10-cv-09508-MMM-AJW
FINAL JUDGMENT

Plaintiffs,
v.
AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR
CO., INC.,
Defendant.

27
28
[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT

1

The Settlement Agreement and Release entered into on March 18, 2013 (the

2

“Settlement Agreement”) between Plaintiffs and Defendant in the above-captioned

3

class action (the “Action”) was presented at the Fairness Hearing on October 28,

4

2013, pursuant to the Preliminary Approval Order entered on April 11, 2013. The

5

Court has determined that notice of the Fairness Hearing was given in accordance

6

with the Preliminary Approval Order to members of the Settlement Class, and that

7

the notice was adequate.

8

approving the parties’ settlement of this action and awarding attorneys’ fee, costs,

9

and incentive awards. Accordingly,

10
11
12
13
14

1.

On January 21, the court entered an order finally

This Judgment incorporates by reference the definitions in the

Settlement Agreement.
2.

This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Action and

over all members of the Settlement Class.
3.

The Notice has been disseminated to the Settlement Class in the

15

manner directed by the Preliminary Approval Order, and a declaration from

16

Gregory A. Romer attesting to the proof of the mailing of the Notice to the

17

Settlement Class has been filed with the Court. The Court finds that the Notice

18

fairly and accurately informed Settlement Class Members of the material aspects

19

of this Action and the proposed settlement and constituted adequate notice. The

20

Notice apprised Class Members of the pendency of this Action, their right to

21

object or exclude themselves from the proposed settlement, and their right to

22

appear at the Fairness Hearing, and it conformed with the requirements of Federal

23

Rule of Civil Procedure 23(c)(2).

24

4.

This Court approves the terms of the Settlement Agreement as fair,

25

reasonable, and adequate and in the best interests of the Settlement Class. In

26

arriving at this conclusion, the Court has considered:

27

a.

The strength of the Class Members’ case;

28
Page 1
[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT

b.

1

The risk, expense, complexity, and likely duration of
further litigation;

2
c.

3

The risk of maintaining class action status throughout
the trial;

4
5

d.

The amount offered in Settlement;

6

e.

The extent of discovery completed and the stage of the
proceedings;

7
8

f.

The experience and views of counsel;

9

g.

The presence of a government participant; and

10

h.

The reaction of the Class Members to the proposed
Settlement.

11
12
13

See Class Plaintiffs v. City of Seattle, 955 F.2d 1268, 1291 (9th Cir. 1992).
5.

Regarding the first and fourth factors, the Court finds that the

14

Settlement will result in a recovery that is fair in light of the likely outcome of the

15

litigation.

16

6.

Regarding the second factor, the Court finds that continued litigation

17

would be complex, lengthy, and expensive.

18

accordingly would be exceedingly expensive for the parties and counsel.

19

7.

Continued litigation efforts

Regarding the seventh and eighth factors, the Court finds that

20

reaction to the Settlement from Class Members has been positive, with only a

21

relatively small number of Class Members objecting or opting out of the

22

Settlement, and no governmental officials responding to the 28 U.S.C. § 1715(b)

23

notice with any objections.

24

8.

Regarding the sixth factor, the Court finds that Plaintiffs’ counsel,

25

who support the Settlement, are competent and experienced in class-action

26

litigation.

27
28
Page 2
[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT

1

9.

Regarding the fifth factor, the Court finds that the parties to this case

2

have engaged in significant adversarial discovery and motion practice and that this

3

Settlement is based on a well-developed record.

4
5
6

10.

The Court further finds that the Settlement is the product of arm’s

length negotiations presided over by a competent mediator.
11.

The Court dismisses with prejudice all claims belonging to the

7

Representative Plaintiffs and Settlement Class Members who did not timely and

8

validly request exclusion from the Settlement Class. Except as expressly provided

9

in the Settlement Agreement, each of the Parties, including each Settlement Class

10
11

Member, shall bear his, her or its own costs and attorneys’ fees.
12.

Pursuant to Paragraph 7.1 of the Settlement Agreement, upon the

12

Effective Date the Representative Plaintiffs and each of the Settlement Class

13

Members shall be deemed to have, and by operation of this Judgment shall have,

14

fully, finally and forever released, waived, relinquished and discharged American

15

Honda Motor Co., Inc.; all of its parents, subsidiaries and affiliates, including but

16

not limited to Honda Motor Co., Ltd., Honda North America, Inc., Honda of

17

America Mfg., Inc., Honda R&D Co., Ltd., Honda R&D Americas, Inc., Honda

18

Manufacturing of Alabama, LLC and Honda Engineering North America, Inc.,

19

and each of their respective parent companies, subsidiaries, affiliated companies,

20

divisions and suppliers; all Authorized Honda Dealers and distributors; and the

21

past, present and future officers, directors, shareholders, employees, affiliates,

22

parents, subsidiaries, agents, attorneys, suppliers, vendors, predecessors,

23

successors, insurers, trustees, representatives, heirs, executors, and assigns of all

24

of the foregoing, from any and all claims, demands, rights, liabilities and causes of

25

action of every nature and description whatsoever, known or unknown, suspected

26

or unsuspected, matured or unmatured, contingent or non-contingent, asserted or

27

unasserted, or based upon any theory of law or equity now existing or coming into

28
Page 3
[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT

1

existence in the future, including but not limited to conduct that is negligent,

2

fraudulent, intentional, sounds in warranty either implied or express, contract or a

3

breach of any duty, law or rule, without regard to the subsequent discovery or

4

existence of different or additional facts, arising out of or related in any way to

5

alleged issues relating to camber settings in the Settlement Class Vehicles or the

6

premature, uneven, or irregular wear of tires on the Settlement Class Vehicles;

7

provided, however, that the Released Claims do not include claims for death,

8

personal injury or damage to property. The Released Claims include claims that a

9

Settlement Class Member does not know to exist as of the Effective Date, which if

10

known might have affected the Settlement Class Member’s decision not to object

11

to the settlement, or not to seek exclusion from the Settlement Class. Upon the

12

Effective Date all Settlement Class Members shall be deemed to have, and by

13

operation of this Judgment shall have, expressly waived the rights and benefits of

14

any provision of the laws of the United States or of any state or territory which

15

provides that a general release does not extend to claims which a party does not

16

know or suspect to exist at the time of agreeing to the release, which if known to

17

the party may have materially affected the decision to provide the release.

18

13.

The Representative Plaintiffs and all Settlement Class Members are

19

enjoined from commencing, prosecuting, instituting, continuing, or in any way

20

participating in the commencement or prosecution of any suit asserting any of the

21

Released Claims against any of the Released Persons. This injunction does not

22

affect the rights of any state or federal agency to take any regulatory action it sees

23

fit or preclude Plaintiffs and Settlement Class Members from cooperating or

24

participating in such an action.

25

14.

The Settlement Agreement and any related negotiations, statements,

26

or proceedings shall not be construed or deemed evidence of an admission by any

27

of the Released Persons or any other person of any fault, liability, or wrongdoing

28
Page 4
[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT

1

as to any facts or claims asserted in the Action, or that any person has suffered any

2

damage attributable in any manner to any of the Released Persons. The existence

3

of the Settlement Agreement, its contents, and any related negotiations,

4

statements, or proceedings shall not be offered or admitted into evidence or

5

otherwise used by any person for any purpose in the Action or otherwise, except

6

as may be necessary to enforce the settlement. Notwithstanding the foregoing,

7

any of the Released Persons may file the Settlement Agreement, or any judgment

8

or order of the Court related to it, in any other action that may be brought against

9

them, to support any defenses based on res judicata, collateral estoppel, release, or

10
11

any other theory of claim preclusion or issue preclusion.
15.

The Court approves attorneys’ fees to Class Counsel in the amount of

12

$2,853,585.35. The Court further approves expenses to Class Counsel in the

13

amount of $303,197.14. Within 30 days after the Effective Date, or within 30

14

days after the date when all appeals with respect to Class Counsel fees and

15

expenses have been fully resolved, whichever occurs later, Honda shall pay these

16

amounts to Michael A. Caddell of Caddell & Chapman to be distributed to Class

17

Counsel.

18

16.

The Court awards a service award of $35,000 in total and directs

19

Honda to pay this amount to the Representative Plaintiffs through Class Counsel,

20

to be distributed as shown in the table below.

21
PLAINTIFF

AWARD

David J. Keegan

$5,500

24

Luis Garcia

$5,500

25

Eric Ellis

$5,500

26

Charles Wright

$5,500

27

Bet Kolstad

$5,500

28

Carol Hinkle

$5,500

22
23

Page 5
[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT

1

PLAINTIFF

AWARD

2

Shawn Phillips

$1,000

3

Benittia Hall

$1,000

4

Total

$35,000

5
6

17.

The Court finds that these amounts are reasonable in light of the

7

Representative Plaintiffs’ contributions to the litigation, with the larger awards to

8

Mssrs. Keegan, Garcia, Ellis, Wright, Kolstad, and Hinkle being justified by the

9

greater inconvenience experienced by these Representative Plaintiffs from having

10
11

been deposed and having presented their vehicles for inspection.
18.

If the settlement does not become effective in accordance with the

12

terms of the Settlement Agreement, then this Judgment shall be void as provided

13

in the Settlement Agreement.

14

19.

All Settlement Class Members who failed to file a timely and valid

15

objection to the Settlement Agreement are deemed to have waived any objections

16

and are bound by all terms of the Settlement Agreement, including the release and

17

this Final Judgment.

18

20.

Without affecting the finality of the Final Judgment in any way, the

19

Court reserves continuing and exclusive jurisdiction over the parties, including all

20

members of the Settlement Class as defined above, and the execution,

21

consummation, administration, and enforcement of the terms of the Settlement

22

Agreement.

23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 6
[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT

1
2

21.

The Parties to the Settlement Agreement are directed to consummate

3

the settlement in accordance with the Settlement Agreement, and the Clerk of this

4

Court is directed to enter this Final Judgment.

5
SUPPLEMENT

6
7
8

22.

Pursuant to Rules 23(a) and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil

Procedure, the court previously certified the following Settlement Class:

9

All residents of the United States, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the

10

U.S. Virgin Islands, and Guam who currently own or lease, or previously

11

owned or leased, 2006 and 2007 Honda Civics, 2006 and 2007 Honda

12

Civic Hybrids, and 2008 Honda Civic Hybrids with a VIN range of

13

JHMFA3 85000001 - JHMFA3 85010456, distributed for sale or lease in

14

the United States (including Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin

15

Islands).

16
17

23.

Pursuant to Rule 23(c)(5), the court previously certified the following

settlement subclass, called the Settlement Si Subclass:

18

All members of the Settlement Class who currently own or lease, or

19

previously owned or leased, a Settlement Class Vehicle designated as a

20

"Civic Si."

21

24.

Finding that the requirements for approving a settlement class and

22

subclass pursuant to Rules 23(a) and (b)(3) have been met, the court affirms its

23

certification of the Settlement Class and the Settlement Si Subclass.

24

25.

Pursuant to Rule 23(a), the court finds that plaintiffs David J. Keegan,

25

Luis Garcia, Eric Ellis, Charles Wright, Bet Kolstad, Carol Hinkle, Shawn Phillips,

26

and Benettia Hall are members of the class, their claims are typical of the class, and

27

they fairly and adequately protected the interests of the class throughout the

28
Page 7
[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT

1

proceedings in the litigation. Accordingly, the court appoints David J. Keegan, Luis

2

Garcia, Eric Ellis, Charles Wright, Bet Kolstad, Carol Hinkle, Shawn Phillips, and

3

Benettia Hall as class representatives. Additionally, the court finds that plaintiff

4

Shawn Phillips is a member of the subclass, his claims are typical of the subclass, and

5

he fairly and adequately protected the interests of the subclass throughout the

6

proceedings in the litigation. Accordingly, the court appoints Shawn Phillips as

7

representative of the Si subclass.

8

26.

Having considered the factors set forth in Rule 23(g)(1), the court finds

9

that Class Counsel fairly and adequately represented the class for purposes of entering

10

into and implementing the settlement, and thus appoints Michael A. Caddell, Cynthia

11

B. Chapman, and Cory S. Fein of Caddell & Chapman; Payam Shahian of Strategic

12

Legal Practices, APC; Robert L. Starr of The Law Office of Robert L. Starr; and

13

Matthew R. Mendelsohn and David A. Mazie of Mazie Slater Katz & Freeman, LLC

14

as Class Counsel on behalf of the class and the subclass.

15
16

Date: January 21, 2014

17
18

MARGARET M. MORROW
U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Page 8

[PROPOSED] FINAL JUDGMENT