Guzman-Padilla, et al. v. Van de Pol, et al.

Filing 51

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Kendall J. Newman on 10/13/17 GRANTING Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and CONSENT DECREE Re 37 Motion. The Settlement is HEREBY APPROVED in its entirety. The Action is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, w ith each party to bear his, her, or its own costs, except as set forth herein, and with this Court retaining exclusive jurisdiction to enforce Consent Decree, including over disbursement of the Settlement Fund. (Mena-Sanchez, L) Modified on 10/13/2017 (Mena-Sanchez, L).

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ALTSHULER BERZON LLP JAMES M. FINBERG (SBN 114850) EVE H. CERVANTEZ (SBN 164709) MEREDITH A. JOHNSON (SBN 291018) 177 Post Street, Suite 300 San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 421-7151 Facsimile:(415) 362-8064 jfinberg@altber.com ecervantez@altber.com mjohnson@altber.com CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION DAWSON MORTON (SBN 802667, Registered Legal Services Attorney) R. ERANDI ZAMORA (SBN 281929) ALEXANDRA REVELAS (SBN 305201) 2210 K Street, Suite 201 Sacramento, CA 95816 Telephone: (916) 538-877 Facsimile: (916) 446-3057 dmorton@crlaf.org ezamora@crlaf.org arevelas@crlaf.org Attorneys for individuals HERNAN GUZMANPADILLA, CIPRIANO BENITEZ, CARLOS FABIAN TORRES PEREZ, and GUILLERMO BENITEZ SANTOYO and the Employee and Housing Classes [Additional Counsel for Plaintiffs listed on next page] UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Case No. 2:17-cv-00196-JAM-KJN HERNAN GUZMAN-PADILLA, CIPRIANO BENITEZ, CARLOS FABIAN TORRES PEREZ, and [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING FINAL GUILLERMO BENITEZ SANTOYO APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION individually and on behalf of all others SETTLEMENT AND [PROPOSED] CONSENT similarly situated. DECREE Plaintiffs, vs. GERARD VAN DE POL; HENRY VAN DE POL; AND GERARD VAN DE POL AND HENRY VAN DE POL d/b/a/ G&H DAIRY Defendant. 27 28 [Proposed] Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and [Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. 2:17-cv-00196-KJN 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 MAYALL HURLEY P.C. ROBERT J. WASSERMAN, Bar No. 258538 WILLIAM J. GORHAM, Bar No. 151773 NICHOLAS J. SCARDIGLI, Bar No. 249947 VLADIMIR J. KOZINA, Bar No. 284645 2453 Grand Canal Boulevard Stockton, California 95207-8253 Telephone: (209) 477-3833 Facsimile: (209) 477-4818 rwasserman@mayallaw.com wgorham@mayallaw.com nscardigli@mayallaw.com vjkozina@mayallaw.com Attorneys for individuals HERNAN GUZMANPADILLA, CIPRIANO BENITEZ, CARLOS FABIAN TORRES PEREZ, and GUILLERMO BENITEZ SANTOYO and the Employee and Housing Classes 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [Proposed] Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and [Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. 2:17-cv-00196-KJN Plaintiffs’ unopposed Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and entirety of 1 2 [Proposed] Consent Decree came before this Court on October 12, 2017. The proposed settlement in 3 this case was preliminarily approved by this Court on August 16, 2017. Pursuant to the Court’s 4 Preliminary Approval Order and the Notice provided to the Class, the Court conducted a final 5 fairness hearing as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e). The Court has reviewed the 6 materials submitted by the parties and has heard arguments presented by counsel at the hearing. For 7 the reasons cited on the record as well as those stated hereafter, the Court HEREBY FINDS AND 8 ORDERS as follows: 9 1. The Court hereby grants final approval of the Class Settlement based upon the terms 10 set forth in the [Proposed] Consent Decree (“Settlement”) filed by the parties. The Settlement is fair, 11 adequate, and reasonable to the Class. 12 13 2. Except as otherwise specified herein, for purposes of this Final Approval Order, the Court adopts all defined terms set forth in the Settlement. 14 3. The Court finds that this action satisfies the requirements of Rule 23 and further finds 15 that the Employee Class and Housing Class are adequately represented by the Named Plaintiffs and 16 Class Counsel. 17 4. The Notice approved by the Court was provided by First Class direct mail to the last- 18 known address of each of the individuals identified as Employee or Housing Class Members. In 19 addition, follow-up efforts were made to send the Notice to those individuals whose original notices 20 were returned as undeliverable. The Notice adequately described all of the relevant and necessary 21 parts of the proposed Settlement Agreement, the request for incentive payments to the Named 22 Plaintiffs, and Class Counsel's motion for an award of attorney’s fees and costs.1 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 Of the 120 class members, plaintiffs were unable to identify current addresses for eight individuals, whose names were read into the record during the October 12, 2017 hearing. Plaintiffs sent notices to each class member’s last known address. For any notices that were returned, plaintiffs sought forwarding addresses from the United States Post Office, as well as from defense counsel. If still unable to find an address for an individual, plaintiffs then attempted to locate that person through a “skip trace” method. At the end of these efforts, plaintiffs were still unable to find addresses for eight individual class members. The parties have agreed that the payments intended for these eight will be reallocated among the remaining 112 class members. 1 [Proposed] Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and [Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. 2:17-cv-00196-KJN 1 5. The Court finds that the Notice given to the Employee or Housing Class Members 2 fully complied with Rule 23, was the best notice practicable, satisfied all constitutional due process 3 concerns, and provides the Court with jurisdiction over the Employee or Housing Class Members. 4 6. The Court has concluded that the Settlement, as set forth in [Proposed] Consent 5 Decree is fair, reasonable, and adequate under state and federal laws, and is ordered finally 6 approved. Each Member of the Employee Class and Housing Class will be bound by the Settlement 7 and all terms and provisions of the Settlement. The Court finds that the Settlement is rationally 8 related to the strength of Plaintiffs’ claims given the risk, complexity, and duration of further 9 litigation. The Court also finds that the Settlement is the result of arms-length negotiations between 10 experienced counsel representing the interests of the Class and Defendant, after factual and legal 11 investigation. The Court finds that the uncertainty and delay of further litigation strongly supports 12 the reasonableness and adequacy of comprehensive injunctive relief and $600,000 in monetary relief 13 provided by the [Proposed] Consent Decree. 14 7. Out of the Employee or Housing Class Members who were notified, none has 15 objected to any aspect of the proposed settlement, and none has opted out. The reaction of the Class 16 to the proposed settlement strongly supports the conclusion that the proposed Settlement is fair, 17 reasonable, and adequate. 18 8. The Settlement is HEREBY APPROVED in its entirety. 19 9. The Settlement Fund shall be dispersed in accordance with the [Proposed] Consent 20 Decree as detailed in the [Proposed] Consent Decree. The Court shall enter the [Proposed] Consent 21 Decree as its order. 22 10. 23 24 The Court approves the Settlement of Plaintiffs’ PAGA claims as required by Cal. Lab. Code §2699(I)(2). 11. The Action is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, with each party to bear his, 25 her, or its own costs, except as set forth herein, and with this Court retaining exclusive jurisdiction to 26 enforce [Proposed] Consent Decree, including over disbursement of the Settlement Fund. If for any 27 reason, the Settlement ultimately does not become final, this Final Approval Order will be vacated, 28 the Parties will return to their respective positions in this action as those positions existed 2 [Proposed] Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and [Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. 2:17-cv-00196-KJN 1 immediately before the Parties executed the Settlement. 2 Dated: October 13, 2017 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 [Proposed] Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and [Proposed] Consent Decree Case No. 2:17-cv-00196-KJN

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?