Turk v. Gale/Triangle, Inc. et al
JUDGMENT dated *9/27/17* signed by District Judge Morrison C. England, Jr on 9/26/17. (Mena-Sanchez, L)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
11 STEVE TURK, an individual,
Case No. 2:16-cv-00783-MCE-DB
15 GALE/TRIANGLE, INC. a New Jersey
March 23, 2017
corporation; and PERFORMANCE
16 TEAM FREIGHT SYSTEMS, INC., a
17 California corporation; and Does 1
Judge: Hon. Morrison C. England,
through 50, inclusive,
JUDGMENT DISMISSING CASE
On September 21, 2017, the Court granted the Parties’ Joint Motion for Final
3 Approval of Class Action Settlement and Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and
4 Costs. The Court thereby enters Judgment in this case as follows:
The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action, the
6 Class Representative, and the Class Members as defined in the Settlement
7 Agreement and Defendants.
The Court grants final approval, for purposes of settlement only, of the
9 Class as defined in the Settlement Agreement.
The Court finds that the Settlement Agreement was the product of
11 protracted, arms-length negotiations between experienced counsel. The Court finds,
12 for settlement purposes only, that the Class satisfied the applicable standards for
13 certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedures 23.
This case is dismissed on the merits with prejudice.
The parties are hereby directed to fully implement any remaining
16 obligations under the Settlement Agreement.
Sutton Hague Law Corporation is approved as Class Counsel and is
18 hereby awarded $195,000 for attorneys’ fees and $17,925 for reimbursement of
19 litigation costs and expenses, which the Court finds were reasonably incurred in
20 prosecution of this case.
Steven Turk is awarded $10,000 for his services in initiating and
22 maintaining this litigation as Class Representative.
The Claims Administrator is awarded $9,499 as payment for handling
24 the administration of the Settlement in this case.
Payment of $7,500 is hereby approved to the Labor and Workforce
26 Development Agency for the resolution of the claims brought in this case under the
27 Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 (Cal. Lab. Code §§ 2698, et
1 seq.). This payment represents the California Labor and Workforce Development
2 Agency’s share of the $10,000 of the Settlement Proceeds allocated PAGA
3 penalties. The remaining $2,500 of the $10,000 in Settlement Proceeds allocated to
4 PAGA penalties shall be disbursed to the aggrieved employees in accordance with
5 the terms of the Settlement.
The Court shall have exclusive and continuing jurisdiction over this
7 matter for the purposes of supervising the implementation, enforcement,
8 construction, administration, and interpretation of the Settlement Agreement and
9 this Judgment.
This document shall constitute a judgment for purposes of Rule 59 of
11 the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
Upon entry of this Judgment and the release of the Settlement Proceeds
13 to the claims administrator in this case, the Released Parties, as defined in the
14 Settlement Agreement, shall be released and discharged from any and all liability as
15 set forth in the Settlement Agreement between the Parties.
Plaintiffs and Class Members shall be precluded from instituting,
17 commencing, or continuing to prosecute, directly or indirectly, as an individual or
18 collectively, representatively, derivatively, or on behalf of himself, herself, itself, or
19 in any other capacity of any kind whatsoever, any action in this Court, any state
20 court, or any arbitration or mediation proceeding or any other similar proceeding,
21 against any Released Party, as defined in the Settlement Agreement, that asserts any
22 claims that are Released Claims or other claims released herein under the terms of
23 the Settlement.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
25 Dated: September 26, 2017
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?