Donald M Lusnak v. Bank of America, N.A. et al
Filing
130
ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS SETTLEMENT by Judge George H. Wu, in favor of Donald M Lusnak against Bank of America, N.A. Related to: Order on Motion for Settlement, Order on Motion for Attorney Fees, Motion Hearing, [1 29]. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows: 1. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein have the meanings set forth in the Settlement Agreement. 2. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S. C. § 1332(d), and has personal jurisdiction over the Parties and the Settlement Class Members. Venue is proper in this District. 3. The "Settlement Class" for purposes of this Final Order and Judgment means: (see document for details). (MD JS-6, Case Terminated). (mrgo)
JS-6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
11
12
DONALD M. LUSNAK, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly
situated,
13
Plaintiff,
14
v.
15
Case No. CV 14-1855-GW-GJSx
ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT
GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF
CLASS SETTLEMENT
BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.; and
DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,
16
17
Judge: Hon. George Wu
Defendant.
18
19
This matter came before the Court for hearing on August 10, 2020, pursuant
20
to the Court’s Preliminary Approval Order dated January 30, 2020 (Dkt. No. 117),
21
and on the motion (“Motion”) for final approval of the Class Action Settlement
22
Agreement and Release, dated December 27, 2019 entered into by the Parties (the
23
“Settlement Agreement”), as well as Settlement Class Counsel’s motion for an
24
award of attorneys’ fees and expenses and for a Plaintiff service award (“Fee
25
Motion”). Due and adequate notice having been given to the Settlement Class
26
Members of the proposed Settlement and the pending motions, as directed by the
27
Court’s Preliminary Approval Order, and upon consideration of all papers filed and
28
proceedings had herein, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED,
-1-
1
2
3
4
ADJUDGED AND DECREED as follows:
1.
Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein have the meanings set
forth in the Settlement Agreement.
2.
This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to
5
28 U.S.C. § 1332(d), and has personal jurisdiction over the Parties and the
6
Settlement Class Members. Venue is proper in this District.
7
8
3.
The “Settlement Class” for purposes of this Final Order and Judgment
means:
9
All mortgage loan customers of Bank of America—including any
10
customers whose loans were originated by Bank of America, whose
11
loans Bank of America later acquired an ownership interest in, or
12
whose loans Bank of America serviced—whose mortgage loan is for
13
a one- to four-family residence located in California, and who paid
14
Bank of America money in advance for payment of taxes and
15
assessments on the property, for insurance, or for other purposes
16
relating to the property, and did not receive at least 2 percent simple
17
interest per annum on the amounts so held by Bank of America from
18
July 1, 2008 to December 31, 2018. “Bank of America” as used in this
19
definition includes Bank of America Corp., Bank of America, N.A.,
20
and their subsidiaries or predecessors. Excluded from the Settlement
21
Class will be those persons who submitted a timely and valid Request
22
for Exclusion in accordance with the procedures set forth in the
23
Settlement Agreement and in this Court’s Preliminary Approval Order.
24
4.
25
26
The Court finds that the notice provisions set forth under the Class
Action Fairness Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1715, were complied with in this matter.
5.
The Court finds that the Notice program for disseminating notice to the
27
Settlement Class, provided for in the Settlement Agreement and previously
28
approved and directed by the Court, has been implemented by the Settlement
-2-
1
Administrator and the Parties. The Court finds that such Notice program, including
2
the approved forms of notice: (a) constituted the best notice that is practicable under
3
the circumstances; (b) included direct individual notice to all Settlement Class
4
Members who could be identified through reasonable effort; (c) constituted notice
5
that was reasonably calculated, under the circumstances, to apprise Settlement
6
Class Members of the nature of the Lawsuit, the definition of the Settlement Class
7
certified, the class claims and issues, the opportunity to enter an appearance through
8
an attorney if the member so desires; the opportunity, the time, and manner for
9
requesting exclusion from the Settlement Class, and the binding effect of a class
10
judgment; (d) constituted due, adequate and sufficient notice to all persons entitled
11
to notice; and (e) met all applicable requirements of Federal Rule of Civil
12
Procedure 23, due process under the U.S. Constitution, and any other applicable
13
law.
14
6.
The Court hereby finds that all Settlement Class Members and all persons
15
who fall within the definition of the Settlement Class have been adequately provided
16
with an opportunity to exclude themselves from the Settlement Class by submitting a
17
Request for Exclusion in conformance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement and
18
this Court’s Preliminary Approval Order. All persons who submitted timely and valid
19
Requests for Exclusion are not bound by this Final Order and Judgment. A list of those
20
persons who submitted timely and valid Requests for Exclusion is attached as
21
Attachment 1 to the Supplemental Declaration of Cameron R. Azari, Esq. on
22
Implementation of Settlement Notice Plan, on file in this case at Dkt. No. 126-1. All
23
other persons who fall within the definition of the Settlement Class are Settlement Class
24
Members and part of the Settlement Class, and shall be bound by this Final Order and
25
Judgment and the Settlement Agreement.
26
7.
The Court reaffirms that this Lawsuit is properly maintained as a class
27
action, for settlement purposes only, pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
28
23(a) and 23(b)(3).
-3-
1
8.
The Court finds that, for settlement purposes, the Settlement Class, as
2
defined above, meets the requirements for class certification under Federal Rules of
3
Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(3)— namely, that (1) the Settlement Class
4
Members are sufficiently numerous such that joinder is impracticable; (2) there are
5
common questions of law and fact; (3) Plaintiff’s claims are typical of those of the
6
Settlement Class Members; (4) Plaintiff and Class Counsel have adequately
7
represented, and will continue to adequately represent, the interests of the
8
Settlement Class Members; and (5) for purposes of settlement, the Settlement Class
9
meets the predominance and superiority requirements of Rule 23(b)(3).
10
9.
The Court reaffirms its appointment of Plaintiff Donald M. Lusnak as
11
Settlement Class Representative to represent the Settlement Class, and reaffirms its
12
appointment of Settlement Class Counsel to represent the Settlement Class.
13
10.
The Court finds that the Settlement Agreement warrants final
14
approval pursuant to Rule 23(e)(2) because, the Court finds, the Settlement
15
Agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate and is in the best interest of the
16
Settlement Class, after weighing the relevant considerations. First, the Court finds
17
that Plaintiff and Settlement Class Counsel have adequately represented the
18
Settlement Class, and will continue to do so through settlement implementation.
19
Second, the proposed Settlement Agreement was reached as a result of arms-length
20
negotiations through an experienced mediator, Eric Green of Resolutions LLC, and
21
comes after years of litigation, significant discovery, and full briefing on class
22
certification. Third, the Court finds that the relief proposed to be provided for the
23
Settlement Class is fair, reasonable, and adequate, taking into account: (i) the costs,
24
risks, and delay of trial and appeal; (ii) the effectiveness of the proposed method of
25
distributing relief to the Settlement Class, which, under the Settlement Agreement,
26
will occur via direct distribution without the need for Settlement Class Members to
27
submit claims; and (iii) the terms of the requested award of attorneys’ fees and
28
costs. Fourth, the Court finds that the Settlement Agreement treats Settlement
-4-
1
Class Members equitably relative to each other. Under the terms of the Settlement
2
Agreement, Settlement Class Members will be sent a settlement payment, which
3
will be based on the unpaid escrow interest each of them is allegedly owed.
4
Specifically, each Settlement Class Member will receive a minimum payment of
5
$5.00, plus a portion of remaining settlement payment funds (after payment of
6
attorney’s fees and costs, service award, and notice and administration costs) in
7
amounts directly proportionate to the alleged unpaid escrow interest for their loan.
8
9
11.
In granting final approval of the Settlement Agreement, the Court has
also considered the factors that courts in this Circuit consider in evaluating
10
proposed class settlements—which overlap considerably with the factors to be
11
considered under Rule 23(e)(2)—including the strength of Plaintiff’s case; the risk,
12
expense, complexity, and likely duration of further litigation; the risk of
13
maintaining class action status throughout the trial; the amount offered in the
14
settlement; the extent of discovery completed and the stage of the proceedings; the
15
experience and views of counsel; the lack of any objection from any governmental
16
participant following notice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1715; and the reaction of the
17
class members to the proposed settlement. See Churchill Village LLC v. General
18
Electric Corp., 361 F.3d 566, 575 (9th Cir. 2004). With respect to the reaction of
19
the class members, the Court notes direct notice was sent to the Settlement Class,
20
there were no objections submitted to the Settlement, and only 25 requests for
21
exclusion from the Settlement Class were submitted.
22
12.
The Motion is hereby GRANTED, and the Settlement Agreement and
23
its terms are hereby found to be and APPROVED as fair, reasonable, and adequate
24
and in the best interest of the Settlement Class. The Parties and Settlement
25
Administrator are directed to consummate and implement the Settlement
26
Agreement in accordance with its terms, including distributing settlement payments
27
to the Settlement Class Members and other disbursements from the Settlement
28
Consideration as provided by the Settlement Agreement.
-5-
1
13.
The Lawsuit is hereby dismissed with prejudice and without costs to
2
any Party, other than as specified in the Settlement Agreement, this Final Order and
3
Judgment, and any order(s) by this Court regarding Settlement Class Counsel’s
4
motion for attorneys’ fees, expenses, and service award.
5
14.
In consideration of the benefits provided under the Settlement
6
Agreement, and for other good and valuable consideration set forth in the
7
Settlement Agreement, each of the Settlement Class Members and Releasing Parties
8
shall, by operation of this Final Order and Judgment, have fully, finally, and forever
9
released, relinquished, acquitted, and discharged all Released Claims against all
10
Released Parties in accordance with Section 3.8 of the Settlement, the terms of
11
which section are incorporated herein by reference. The terms of the Settlement
12
Agreement, which are incorporated by reference into this Order, shall have res
13
judicata and other preclusive effects as to the Released Claims as against the
14
Released Parties. The Released Parties may file the Settlement Agreement and/or
15
this Order in any other litigation to support a defense or counterclaim based on
16
principles of res judicata, collateral estoppel, release, good-faith settlement,
17
judgment bar or reduction, or any similar defense or counterclaim.
18
15.
All Settlement Class Members and Releasing Parties have covenanted
19
not to sue any Released Party with respect to any Released Claim and shall be
20
permanently barred and enjoined from instituting, commencing, prosecuting,
21
continuing, or asserting any Released Claim against any Released Party. This
22
permanent bar and injunction is necessary to protect and effectuate the Settlement
23
Agreement and this Order, and this Court’s authority to effectuate the Settlement,
24
and is ordered in aid of this Court’s jurisdiction and to protect its judgments.
25
Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in this Order and judgment shall preclude
26
an action to enforce the terms of the Settlement Agreement.
27
28
16.
Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, Plaintiff,
Settlement Class Counsel, Bank of America, and Bank of America’s Counsel have,
-6-
1
and shall be deemed to have, released each other from any and all Claims relating
2
in any way to any Party or counsel’s conduct in this Lawsuit, including but not
3
limited to any Claims of abuse of process, malicious prosecution, or any other
4
claims arising out of the institution, prosecution, assertion or resolution of this
5
Lawsuit, including Claims for attorneys’ fees, costs of suit, or sanctions of any kind
6
except as otherwise expressly set forth in Section 3.7 of the Settlement Agreement.
7
8
9
17.
This Final Judgment and Order is the final, appealable judgment in the
Lawsuit as to all Released Claims.
18.
Without affecting the finality of this Final Order and Judgment in any
10
way, this Court retains jurisdiction over (a) implementation of the Settlement
11
Agreement and the terms of the Settlement Agreement; (b) Settlement Class
12
Counsel’s motion for attorneys’ fees, expenses, and service award; (c) distribution
13
of the Settlement Consideration, Settlement Class Counsel attorneys’ fees and
14
expenses, and any Plaintiff service award; and (d) all other proceedings related to
15
the implementation, interpretation, validity, administration, consummation, and
16
enforcement of the terms of the Settlement Agreement. The time to appeal from
17
this Final Order and Judgment shall commence upon its entry.
18
19.
In the event that the Settlement Agreement Effective Date does not
19
occur, this Final Order and Judgment shall be rendered null and void and shall be
20
vacated, nunc pro tunc, except insofar as expressly provided to the contrary in the
21
Settlement Agreement, and without prejudice to the status quo ante rights of
22
Plaintiff, Settlement Class Members, and Bank of America.
23
20.
This Final Order and Judgment, the Preliminary Approval Order, the
24
Settlement Agreement, and all negotiations, statements, agreements, and
25
proceedings relating to the Settlement Agreement, and any matters arising in
26
connection with settlement negotiations, proceedings, or agreements shall not
27
constitute, be described as, construed as, offered or received against Bank of
28
America or the other Released Parties as evidence or an admission of: (a) the truth
-7-
1
of any fact alleged by Plaintiff in the Lawsuit; (b) any liability, negligence, fault, or
2
wrongdoing of Bank of America or the Released Parties; or (c) that this Lawsuit or
3
any other action may be properly certified as a class action for litigation, non-
4
settlement purposes.
5
21.
The Fee Motion is also hereby GRANTED. The Court APPROVES:
6
(a) payment to Settlement Class Counsel of attorneys’ fees and expenses in the total
7
amount of $8,750,000.00 (consisting of $8,511,043.66 in attorneys’ fees, plus
8
$238,956.34 in reimbursement of litigation expenses); and (b) payment of a service
9
award in the amount $10,000.00 to Plaintiff, to compensate him for his
10
commitment and effort on behalf of the Settlement Class, with such attorneys’ fees,
11
expenses, and service award to be paid from the $35 million common Settlement
12
Consideration pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement.
13
22.
The Court finds that the fee requested by Settlement Class Counsel is
14
reasonable and appropriate under applicable standards and justified by the
15
circumstances of this case. The Court finds that the fee requested is reasonable
16
under the percentage-of-the-fund approach and under a lodestar-multiplier cross-
17
check. In re Wash. Pub. Power Supply Sys. Sec. Litig., 19 F.3d 1291, 1296 (9th
18
Cir. 1994); Vizcaino v. Microsoft Corp., 290 F.3d 1043, 1050 & n.5 (9th Cir. 2002).
19
23.
With respect to Settlement Class Counsel’s request for reimbursement
20
of their litigation expenses, the Court finds that the expenses incurred are
21
reasonable and should be reimbursed. Staton v. Boeing Co., 327 F.3d 938, 974 (9th
22
Cir. 2003).
23
24.
With respect to the requested service award for Plaintiff, the Court
24
finds that such an award is appropriate, Staton, 327 F.3d at 977; Rodriguez v. West
25
Publ’g Corp., 563 F.3d 948, 958 (9th Cir. 2009), and that the amount requested is
26
within the range regularly awarded by Ninth Circuit courts and justified by the
27
circumstances in this case.
28
25.
The Court also notes that no Settlement Class Member objected to the
-8-
1
Settlement or to the requested attorneys’ fees, expenses, or service awards—the
2
amounts of which were included in the class notice.
3
26.
Pursuant to Rule 54, the Court finds that there is no just reason for
4
delay and expressly directs this Final Order and Judgment and immediate entry by
5
the Clerk of the Court.
6
7
8
IT IS SO ORDERED.
9
DATED: August 10, 2020
10
________________________
Hon. George H. Wu
United States District Judge
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-9-
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?