Goodwin v. Winn Management Group LLC

Filing 46

ORDER GRANTING JOINT REQUEST TO DISTRIBUTE UNCASHED FUNDS TO CY PRES signed by District Judge Dale A. Drozd on 4/16/2019. (Thorp, J)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

ADAM GOODWIN,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 1:15-cv-00606-DAD-EPG

v.
WINN MANAGEMENT GROUP, LLC,

15

Defendant.

ORDER GRANTING JOINT REQUEST TO
DISTRIBUTE UNCASHED FUNDS TO CY
PRES
(Doc. No. 45)

16
17
On February 23, 2018, the court granted final approval of the class action and FLSA

18
19

settlement reached in this case. (Doc. No. 44.) Under the approved settlement agreement, “[a]ny

20

unclaimed funds in the Settlement Administrator’s account as a result of the failure to timely cash

21

Settlement Share checks shall be distributed by the Settlement Administrator to the State of

22

California, California Department of Industrial Relations Unpaid Wage Fund.” (Doc. No. 28-1 at

23

30.)
According to the parties, the unclaimed funds resulting from the settlement in this matter

24
25

total $3,162.51. (Doc. No. 45 at 2.) On March 12, 2019, the court-appointed Settlement

26

Administrator, CPT Group, Inc., informed counsel that the California Department of Industrial

27

Relations (“DIR”) would not accept the unclaimed wage claim funds because the funds collected

28

/////
1

1

and sent were not investigated by the DIR and because the amounts due to workers were not

2

confirmed by the DIR. (Id.)

3

Because the DIR will not accept the unclaimed funds, the parties have identified Legal

4

Aid at Work as the alternate cy pres recipient of those unclaimed funds. (Id.) Cy pres awards

5

“must be guided by (1) the objectives of the underlying statutes and (2) the interests of the silent

6

class members.” Nachshin v. AOL, 663 F.3d 1034, 1040 (9th Cir. 2011); see also Six (6) Mexican

7

Workers v. Arizona Citrus Growers, 904 F.2d 1301, 1307 (9th Cir. 1990) (stating that distribution

8

of unclaimed funds “should be guided by the objectives of the underlying statute and the interests

9

of the silent class members.”).

10

Here, the parties represent to the court that Legal Aid at Work operates several free legal

11

clinics and helplines that were specifically created to provide direct, individualized help to

12

workers across California. (Doc. No. 45 at 2.) These clinics include: Workers’ Rights Clinic,

13

Workers’ Disability Law Clinic, and Wage Claim Clinic. (Id.) The parties also represent that

14

naming Legal Aid at Work as the cy pres recipient will account for the nature of the instant

15

lawsuit, which alleged unpaid overtime and penalties, the objectives of the underlying statute, and

16

the interests of the silent class members. (Id.) Based on this information provided by the parties,

17

the court is satisfied that Legal Aid at Work is an appropriate cy pres recipient of the unclaimed

18

funds in this case.

19

Accordingly, the parties’ joint stipulation to distribute uncashed funds to cy pres recipient

20

Legal Aid at Work (Doc. No. 45) is granted.

21

IT IS SO ORDERED.

22
23

Dated:

April 16, 2019
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

24
25
26
27
28
2