Jeremy Marble v. American International Group Inc et al
Filing
52
ORDER APPROVING CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT, GRANTING ATTORNEYS FEES AND EXPENSED AND FINAL JUDGMENT by Judge George H. Wu, 51 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, as follows: 1. The Court finds for the purposes of this Settlement, Class Counsel are hereby award ed the following attorneys fees and costs: (i) attorneys fees - $317,400.00; and (ii) costs - $10,836.95, which sum the Court finds to be fair and reasonable, which shall be paid to Plaintiffs Counsel, Geralyn L. Skapik, Skapik Law Group, directly by Defendants. This Court retains jurisdiction over the parties (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (pj)
JS-6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
JEREMY MARBLE on behalf of
himself and on behalf of all others
similarly situated and the General
Public,
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
v.
Plaintiffs,
AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL
GROUP, INC., a Delaware
corporation; CHARTIS, INC., a
Delaware corporation; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive,
Defendants.
CASE NO.: CV11-05720-GW(SSX)
[Hon. Judge George H. Wu]
CLASS ACTION
ORDER APPROVING CLASS
ACTION SETTLEMENT, GRANTING
ATTORNEYS FEES AND EXPENSED
AND FINAL JUDGMENT
DATE:
June 20, 2013
TIME:
8:30 A.M.
COURTROOM: 10
Complaint Filed: May 11, 2011
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-1-
CV11-05720 GW(SSX)
[PROPOSED] ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING SETTLMT,
PROVIDING FOR NTC & SETTING FINAL APPROVAL HRG
1
2
On June 20, 2013, a hearing pursuant to Federal Rule Civil Procedure 23(e)
was held before this Court for the following purpose:
a. To finally determine whether the Class satisfies the applicable
3
4
prerequisites for certification for settlement purposes under Fed. R.
5
Civ. P. 23(a) and (b);
6
b. To determine whether the proposed settlement, as reflected in the
7
Settlement Agreement attached to the Motion for Preliminary
8
Approval [Dkt. No. 43], is fair, reasonable, and adequate, and should
9
be finally approved by the Court;
c. To determine whether the proposed Order and final Judgment should
10
11
be entered, and to determine whether the release by the Class, as set
12
forth in the Settlement Agreement, should be provided;
d. To consider Class Counsel’s application for an award of attorneys’
13
fees and reimbursement of expenses; and
14
e. To rule upon such other matters as the Court may deem appropriate.
15
16
17
18
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, as follows:
1.
The Court finds for the purposes of this Settlement, that the
19
prerequisites under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and (b)(3) have been satisfied in that: (a)
20
the number of Class Members is so numerous that joinder of all members thereof is
21
impracticable; (b) there are questions of law and fact common to the Class; (c) the
22
claims of the Plaintiffs are typical of the claims of the Class Members that they
23
represent; (d) the Plaintiffs have represented, and will fairly and adequately
24
represent, the interests of Class Members; (e) questions of law and fact common to
25
Class Member predominate over any questions affecting only individual members
26
of the Class; and (f) a class action is superior to other available methods for the fair
27
and efficient adjudication of the controversy.
28
2.
Solely for the purposes of this settlement, a settlement class is hereby
-2CV11-05720 GW(SSX)
[PROPOSED] ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING SETTLMT,
PROVIDING FOR NTC & SETTING FINAL APPROVAL HRG
1
certified and defined as follows: “All individuals employed by Defendants as
2
Claims Adjusters (including Claims Analysts, Claims Specialists and Litigation
3
Specialists) in the Private Client Group in either the Auto, Casualty or Property
4
Unit in California between May 11, 2007 and the date that the Court approves this
5
Settlement Agreement (“Settlement Class”).
6
7
8
9
10
11
3.
A member of the Class shall hereinafter be referred to as a “Settlement
Class Member.”
4.
The Court hereby approves, as fair, reasonable, and adequate under
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, the Settlement, and the terms contained in the Settlement
Agreement.
5.
Solely for the purposes of this settlement, Plaintiff Jeremy Marble is
12
appointed as the class representative and Plaintiff’s counsel, Mark J. Skapik and
13
Geralyn L. Skapik of the Skapik Law Group, Brian S. Kabateck of Kabateck Brown
14
Kellner LLP, and Eric C. Morris of the Southern California Lawyers Group, PC,
15
are appointed as Class Counsel.
16
6.
Notice of the pendency of this action (the “Action”) as a class action
17
and of the Stipulation was given to all Class Members who could be identified with
18
reasonable effort. The form and method of notifying the Class of the pendency of
19
the Action as a class action and of the terms and conditions of the proposed
20
settlement embodied in the Stipulation met the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23,
21
due process, and any other applicable law, constitutes the best notice practicable
22
under the circumstances, and constituted due and sufficient notice to all persons and
23
entities entitled thereto.
24
25
26
27
28
7.
The Stipulation and the settlement embodied therein is approved as
fair, reasonable, and adequate.
8.
The obligations incurred pursuant to the Settlement Agreement are in
full and final disposition of the Action.
9.
The operative complaint in the Action is hereby dismissed with
-3CV11-05720 GW(SSX)
[PROPOSED] ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING SETTLMT,
PROVIDING FOR NTC & SETTING FINAL APPROVAL HRG
1
2
prejudice as against Defendants.
10.
Plaintiffs and all Class Members on behalf of themselves, their heirs,
3
executors, administrators, successors and assigns, hereby, with respect to each and
4
every Released Claim (as defined in the Stipulation), release and forever discharge,
5
and shall forever be enjoined from prosecuting, any Released Claims any of the
6
Released Parties, whether or not such Plaintiffs and/or Class Members execute and
7
deliver a Claim Form.
8
9
11.
The Court finds that all parties and their Counsel have complied with
each requirement of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as to all proceeding
10
herein.
11
12.
The Court further finds that the response of the Class to the proposed
12
settlement embodied in the Settlement Agreement supports final settlement
13
approval. No Class Member has filed an objection to the proposed settlement and
14
all Class Members have executed and returned their settlement forms to the Claim
15
Administrator.
16
13.
Class Counsel are hereby awarded the following attorneys’ fees and
17
costs: (i) attorneys’ fees - $317,400.00; and (ii) costs - $10,836.95, which sum the
18
Court finds to be fair and reasonable, which shall be paid to Plaintiffs’ Counsel,
19
Geralyn L. Skapik, Skapik Law Group, directly by Defendants.
20
14.
This Court retains jurisdiction over the parties and the Class Members
21
for all matters relating to this Action, including the administration, interpretation,
22
effectuation or enforcement of the Stipulation and this Order and Final Judgment.
23
24
IT IS SO ORDERED.
25
26
27
Dated: June 20, 2013
By: _____________________________
The Honorable George H. Wu
United States District Court Judge
28
-4-
CV11-05720 GW(SSX)
[PROPOSED] ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING SETTLMT,
PROVIDING FOR NTC & SETTING FINAL APPROVAL HRG
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
PROOF OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, certify and declare that I am over the age of 18 years,
employed in the county of San Bernardino, State of California, and not a party to
the above-entitled cause.
On May 23, 2013, I served a true copy of: [PROPOSED] ORDER
APPROVING CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT, GRANTING ATTORNEYS
FEES AND EXPENSED AND FINAL JUDGMENT by personally delivering it
to the person(s) indicated below in the manner as provided in FRCiv 5(b); by
depositing it in the United States Mail in a sealed envelope with the postage thereon
fully prepaid to the following:
9
10
11
12
13
Nick S. Pujji, Esq.
DLA PIPER LLP (US)
2000 Avenue of the Stars
Suite 400, North Tower
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Attorneys for Defendants:
AMERICAN INTERNATIONAL
GROUP, INC. and CHARTIS, INC.
(310) 595-3000; Fax: (310) 595-3300
nick.pujji@dlapiper.com
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
(BY MAIL) The envelope was mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid.
As follows: I am “readily familiar” with the firm’s practice of collection and
processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be
deposited with U.S. postal service on that same day with postage thereon
fully prepaid at Chino Hills, California in the ordinary course of business. I
am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if
postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date
of deposit for mailing in affidavit.
I hereby certify that I am employed in the office of a member of the Bar of
this Court at whose direction the service was made. I hereby certify under the
penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed May 23, 2013, in Chino Hills, California.
25
26
27
__________________________________
LOURDES CHACON
28
-5-
CV11-05720 GW(SSX)
[PROPOSED] ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING SETTLMT,
PROVIDING FOR NTC & SETTING FINAL APPROVAL HRG
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?