Terry et al v. Wasatch Advantage Group, LLC et al

Filing 308

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller on 5/17/2023 GRANTING 304 Stipulation for Damages Calculation. (Perdue, C.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13

Laura L. Ho (SBN 173179)
[e-mail]
Anne Bellows (SBN 293722)
[e-mail]
Stephanie Tilden (SBN 341486)
[e-mail]
GOLDSTEIN, BORGEN, DARDARIAN & HO
155 Grand Avenue, Suite 900
Oakland, CA 94612
Tel: [phone] ǀ Fax: [phone]
Andrew Wolff (SBN 195092)
[e-mail]
LAW OFFICES OF ANDREW WOLFF, PC
1615 Broadway, 4th Floor
Oakland, CA 94612
Tel: [phone] ǀ Fax: [phone]
Jesse Newmark (SBN 247488)
[e-mail]
CENTRO LEGAL DE LA RAZA
3022 International Blvd., Suite 410
Oakland, CA 94601
Tel: [phone] ǀ Fax: [phone]

17

Jocelyn Larkin (SBN 110817)
[e-mail]
Lindsay Nako (SBN 239090)
[e-mail]
THE IMPACT FUND
2080 Addison Street, Suite 5
Berkeley, CA 94704
Tel: [phone] ǀ Fax: [phone]

18

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Relators and the Certified Classes

14
15
16

19

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SACRAMENTO DIVISION

20
21
22
23
24

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ex rel.
DENIKA TERRY, ROY HUSKEY III, and
TAMERA LIVINGSTON, and each of them for
themselves individually, and for all other persons
similarly situated and on behalf of the UNITED
STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiffs/Relators,

25
26

vs.

27

WASATCH ADVANTAGE GROUP, LLC,
WASATCH PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC.,
WASATCH POOL HOLDINGS, LLC,
CHESAPEAKE APARTMENT HOLDINGS, LLC,

28

Case No.: 2:15-CV-00799-KJM-DB
CLASS ACTION
STIPULATION AND ORDER REGARDING
DAMAGES CALCULATION
Trial Date: None Set

STIPULATION & ORDER RE DAMAGES CALCULATION - CASE NO. 2:15-CV-00799 KJM-DB

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

LOGAN PARK APARTMENTS, LLC, LOGAN
PARK APARTMENTS, LP, ASPEN PARK
HOLDINGS, LLC, BELLWOOD JERRON
HOLDINGS, LLC, BELLWOOD JERRON
APARTMENTS, LP, BENT TREE
APARTMENTS, LLC, CALIFORNIA PLACE
APARTMENTS, LLC, CAMELOT LAKES
HOLDINGS, LLC, CANYON CLUB HOLDINGS,
LLC, COURTYARD AT CENTRAL PARK
APARTMENTS, LLC, CREEKSIDE HOLDINGS,
LTD, HAYWARD SENIOR APARTMENTS, LP,
HERITAGE PARK APARTMENTS, LP, OAK
VALLEY APARTMENTS, LLC, OAK VALLEY
HOLDINGS, LP, PEPPERTREE APARTMENT
HOLDINGS, LP, PIEDMONT APARTMENTS,
LP, POINT NATOMAS APARTMENTS, LLC,
POINT NATOMAS APARTMENTS, LP, RIVER
OAKS HOLDINGS, LLC, SHADOW WAY
APARTMENTS, LP, SPRING VILLA
APARTMENTS, LP, SUN VALLEY HOLDINGS,
LTD, VILLAGE GROVE APARTMENTS, LP,
WASATCH QUAIL RUN GP, LLC, WASATCH
PREMIER PROPERTIES, LLC, WASATCH
POOL HOLDINGS III, LLC,
and DOES 1-4,
Defendants.

15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
STIPULATION & ORDER RE DAMAGES CALCULATION - CASE NO. 2:15-CV-00799 KJM-DB

1

Plaintiffs Denika Terry, Roy Huskey III, and Tamera Livingston on behalf of themselves, the

2

certified classes, and the United States, and Defendants Wasatch Advantage Group, LLC, et al.,

3

stipulate as follows:

4

WHEREAS, on November 23, 2022, the Court issued an order granting Plaintiffs’ Motion

5

for Partial Summary Judgment and denying Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the

6

Alternative Summary Adjudication, or in the Further Alternative, Class Decertification (ECF No.

7

278);

8
9
10
11

WHEREAS, the Court’s November 23 Order held that Defendants are liable to the certified
classes for breach of contract and unfair business practices in violation of California’s Unfair
Competition Law (id. at 14);
WHEREAS, as to Plaintiffs’ class claim for breach of contract, the Court’s November 23

12

Order states, “[D]efendants breached the tenancy addendum by requiring tenants to pay excess rent

13

in the form of charges contained in the ASAs . . . . Plaintiffs were damaged in the amount of the

14

excess rent they were required to pay, which the court will determine in the second phase of this

15

litigation.” (id. at 13-14);

16

WHEREAS, as to Plaintiffs’ class claim for violation of the Unfair Competition Law, the

17

Court’s November 23 order states, “Plaintiffs have suffered injury in the form of lost money or

18

property as a result of defendants’ unlawful practice of requiring plaintiffs to pay additional charges

19

beyond their share of rent set out in the HAP contracts. Here as well, the court will determine exact

20

damages in the second phase of this litigation.” (id. at 14);

21

WHEREAS, Defendants informed Plaintiffs that they plan to argue that Defendants’ costs

22

incurred in providing those additional services to Section 8 tenants should be considered in any

23

damages calculation on the class claims;

24

WHEREAS, Defendants have clarified that they plan to argue that only the value of and costs

25

incurred in providing renters insurance and media packages to Section 8 tenants should be

26

considered in any damages calculation on the class claims in this litigation;

27
28

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs dispute that there is any validity to Defendants’ argument that they are
entitled to an offset for the value of any service and/or the cost of providing any service to Section 8
1
STIPULATION & ORDER RE DAMAGES CALCULATION - CASE NO. 2:15-CV-00799 KJM-DB

1

tenants;

2

WHEREAS, the Parties wish to avoid costly discovery and unnecessary litigation on

3

Plaintiffs’ class claims for breach of contract and violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law

4

by narrowing the scope of the issues;

5
6
7

THEREFORE, THE PARTIES STIPULATE AND JOINTLY REQUEST THAT THE
COURT ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
1.

Defendants reserve their right to argue that the value of the renters’ insurance and

8

media packages received by class tenants and the cost to Defendants of providing renters’ insurance

9

and media packages to class members should be considered in the calculation of any damages or

10

restitution awarded to the class. As to all other services, including RentPlus, security alarms and

11

services, in-unit washers and dryers, uncovered parking, covered parking, parking garages, pet-

12

related services, month-to-month leasing, and storage, Defendants waive any argument that the costs

13

of providing the services or the value of those services are relevant to the calculation of damages or

14

restitution.

15

2.

Defendants’ arguments concerning the value of renters’ insurance and media

16

packages and the cost of providing renters insurance and media packages to Section 8 tenants are

17

limited to the calculation of damages or restitution on Plaintiffs’ certified class claims. Any costs that

18

Defendants incurred to provide additional services are not relevant to Plaintiffs’ claim brought under

19

the False Claims Act.

20

Dated: May 12, 2023

Respectfully submitted,

21

IMPACT FUND

22

/s/ Lindsay Nako
Lindsay Nako
Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Relators and the Certified Classes

23
24
25
26
27
28

Dated: May 12, 2023

Respectfully submitted,
LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP
/s/ Ryan Matthews (authorization obtained on 5/12/23)
Ryan Matthews
Attorneys for Defendants
2

STIPULATION & ORDER RE DAMAGES CALCULATION - CASE NO. 2:15-CV-00799 KJM-DB

1
2

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 17, 2023.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
STIPULATION & ORDER RE DAMAGES CALCULATION - CASE NO. 2:15-CV-00799 KJM-DB