Alder v. County of Yolo
ORDER signed by District Judge Vince Chhabria on 11/20/2017 VACATING the previously scheduled dates for the pretrial conference and trial. Plaintiff's counsel is ORDERED to file a motion for Settlement Approval by 12/4/2017. (Donati, J)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
EVAN ALDER, et al.,
Case No. 16-cv-01682-VC
COUNTY OF YOLO,
ORDER VACATING PRETRIAL
CONFERENCE AND TRIAL DATES;
REQUESTING MOTION FOR
In light of the parties' stipulation and notice of settlement, the previously scheduled dates
for the pretrial conference and trial are vacated. Plaintiffs' counsel is ordered to file a motion for
settlement approval by December 4, 2017 explaining in detail why the settlement agreement is "a
fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute." Slezak v. City of Palo Alto, No. 16-CV03224-LHK, 2017 WL 2688224, at *2 (N.D. Cal. June 22, 2017) (quoting Lynn's Food Stores,
Inc. v. United States, 679 F.2d 1350, 1354-55 (11th Cir. 1982)); see also Beidleman v. City of
Modesto, No. 116CV01100DADSKO, 2017 WL 5257087, at *1-2 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 26, 2017);
Mar v. Genuine Parts Co., No. 2:15-CV-01405-MCE-AC, 2017 WL 1495098, at *1 (E.D. Cal.
Apr. 26, 2017). To evaluate whether the settlement meets this standard, the motion must discuss,
at least, the strength of the plaintiffs' FLSA claims and why plaintiffs' counsel's requested fee
award is reasonable in light of the settlement amount. If, after reviewing the motion, the Court
determines a hearing is required, it will schedule one.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: November 20, 2017
United States District Judge
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?