Suon et al v. County of Alameda et al

Filing 37

ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on February 27, 2009. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 2/27/2009)

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 27 28

Mark E. Merin (State Bar No. 043849) Joshua Kaizuka (State Bar No. 212195) LAW OFFICE OF MARK E. MERIN 2001 P Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, California 95811 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for PLAINTIFFS Gregory J. Rockwell (SBN 67305) BOORNAZIAN, JENSEN & GARTHE A Professional Corporation th 555 12 Street, Suite 1800 P. O. Box 12925 Oakland, CA 94604-2925 Telephone: [phone] Facsimile: [phone] Attorneys for DEFENDANTS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA LISA SUON, JEFFREY PEY, ANDY MEAN, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs. COUNTY OF ALAMEDA, ALAMEDA COUNTY PROBATION DEPARTMENT; ALAMEDA COUNTY CHIEF PROBATION OFFICER DONALD H. BLEVINS, in his individual and official capacity; ALAMEDA COUNTY ASSISTANT CHIEF PROBATION OFFICER SHEILA L. FOSTER, in her individual and official capacity; ALAMEDA COUNTY ASSISTANT CHIEF PROBATION OFFICER RICHARD A. MUENCH, in his individual and official capacity; ALAMEDA COUNTY DEPUTY CHIEF OF JUVENILE FACILITIES WILLIAM E. FENTON, in his individual and official capacity, Defendants. This matter came on regularly for a Fairness Hearing on February 27, 2009, in Courtroom 7 of the above-entitled Court, the Honorable Maxine M. Chesney presiding. Plaintiff Class was represented by 1
[PROPOSED] ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL Suon, et al. v. Alameda County, et al.: USDC, No. Dist., Case No. C 07-1770 MMC

Case No. CV 07-01770MMC ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL

DATE: TIME: CTRM: JUDGE:

February 27, 2009 9:00 a.m. 7 Hon. Maxine M. Chesney

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 27 28

Class Counsel Mark E. Merin of the Law Office of Mark E. Merin; Defendants were represented by Gregory J. Rockwell of Boornazian, Jensen & Garthe. After considering the submissions of the parties, including the Stipulated Motion for Preliminary Approval of Provisional Settlement Class and Settlement of Class Action, together with the extensive exhibits attached thereto; the unopposed Application of Plaintiffs' Class Counsel for Award of Attorneys= Fees and Costs; the Joint Submission of the Parties in Support of Final Approval of the Stipulation of Settlement; the arguments of counsel; and the submission from the Class Claims Administrator, IT IS NOW ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED AS FOLLOWS: 1. On August 28, 2008, this Court entered its order preliminarily approving settlement of the

above-captioned class action. Since the entry of the Court=s Preliminary Order, in accordance with the Stipulation of Settlement as proved to the satisfaction of the Court, the requisite notice of the Settlement, with opt-out and objection information, was published in the Oakland Tribune on October 25, 29, and November 5, 2008, and in the East Bay Express on October 29, November 5, and 12, 2008. Announcements of the settlement were made on radio stations KMEL, KYLD & KSOL three times a week during the weeks of November 3, 10 and 17, 2008. The notice of the Settlement and approved claim forms were posted by First Class Mail to the last-known address of each person in the Settlement Class. Both the published notice and the mailed notice specified that Claim Forms had to be delivered to the Claims Administrator, postmarked no later than January 16, 2009. 2. Both the published and mailed notices specified that any person who chose to object to the

Settlement, either personally or through counsel, and desired to appear at the Fairness Hearing, was required to submit a Notice of Intention to appear, together with written arguments in support of any objection, by January 16, 2009. No written objections have been received by counsel and/or filed with the Court. 3. The Court finds that the Class should be and hereby is certified under Rule 23(a) and Rule

23(b)(3) because it satisfies all of the requirements for certification as recited by the Court in the hearing on the fairness of the settlement on February 27, 2009. // // 2
[PROPOSED] ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL Suon, et al. v. Alameda County, et al.: USDC, No. Dist., Case No. C 07-1770 MMC

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 27 28

4.

The Court is satisfied from all of the memoranda of law, declarations, and exhibits

submitted to the Court, that the Stipulation of Settlement is fair, and the Court now finds for the reasons stated on the record at the hearing on February 27, 2009, that the Stipulation of Settlement is fair and finally approves it as such. The Stipulation of Settlement is incorporated herein by this reference as if set out in full. 5. The "Settlement Class" means all of those persons who are members of the following

defined class and sub-classes: a. All juveniles booked and strip searched at Alameda County Juvenile Hall on or before April 11, 2007, who had not reached the age of 20 by March 28, 2007; b. The sub-class of juveniles who were booked solely on misdemeanor, infraction, ordinance violation, or other non-felony offenses not involving violence, drugs or weapons, and strip searched during the period of their incarceration; c. The sub-class of all juveniles booked at Alameda County Juvenile Hall on felony charges not involving violence, drugs or weapons who were strip searched during the period of their incarceration. 6. Persons who previously commenced civil litigation challenging the legality of any strip

search at the Alameda County Juvenile hall during the class period and have prevailed, settled or had their complaints denied on their merits, and persons who have given timely notice of their election to be excluded from the Settlement Class are not included in the Settlement Class. 7. All claims and complaints of the named Representative Plaintiffs, together with all

persons in the Settlement Class, are now dismissed with prejudice as to all of the Released Persons, defined to include all Defendants, their predecessors, successors, and/or assigns, together with past, present and future officials, employees, representatives, attorneys and/or agents of the County of Alameda. Claims and complaints of such persons are now forever barred, and all Settlement Class Members are enjoined from asserting against any Released Persons any and all claims which the Settlement Class Members had, have, or may have in the future arising out of the facts alleged in the complaints. // 3
[PROPOSED] ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL Suon, et al. v. Alameda County, et al.: USDC, No. Dist., Case No. C 07-1770 MMC

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 27 28

8.

Each Released Person is released from the claims which any Settlement Class Member

has had or may in the future have against any such Released Persons arising out of the facts in the complaint. 9. This Court explicitly finds that the Stipulation of Settlement, as amended herein and with

the agreement of the parties as stated on the record at the February 27, 2009 hearing of the matter, specifically, to increase the amount allocated to pay verified claims of the Settlement Class Members, from $2,811,600.00 to $2,886,600.00, and to reduce the amount to be distributed to the Representative Plaintiffs, from $225,000.00 to $150,000.00, which Stipulation of Settlement as amended is now made final by this Judgment, was entered into in good faith, is fair and reasonable, and adequate, and is in the best interest of the Class. The Court expressly finds the amount of attorney's fees and costs sought to be fair and reasonable and expressly approves payment to class counsel, Mark E. Merin of the Law Office of Mark E. Merin, in the amount of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000), as and for attorney fees and costs, for the representation of Settlement Class Members herein, to be paid as provided in the Stipulation of Settlement. 10. The Court further explicitly approves payment from the payment fund of a total of One

Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($150,000.00) to be distributed to the Representative Plaintiffs, Lisa Suon, Jeffrey Pey and Andy Mean, as specified in the Stipulation of Settlement. The Court finds the amount is fair and adequate in view of the damages suffered by the Representative Plaintiffs and the efforts they expended in litigating this case in the more than two years from the time the original claim was filed. 11. Claims have been submitted and, in accordance with the claims processing procedure

specified in the Stipulation of Settlement, will be reviewed, valued, and paid by the Claims Administrator from funds provided by the Defendants as soon as practicable following the effective date of this Judgment, meaning the date it is entered and becomes final. Such Judgment will be deemed final only upon the expiration of the time to appeal or, if a notice of appeal is filed in this matter, upon exhaustion of all appeals and petitions for writ of certiorari. 12. The Court reserves continuing and exclusive jurisdiction over the parties in this action,

including Defendants and all Settlement Class Members, to administer, supervise, construe and enforce 4
[PROPOSED] ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL Suon, et al. v. Alameda County, et al.: USDC, No. Dist., Case No. C 07-1770 MMC

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 27 28

the Settlement in accordance with the terms for the mutual benefit of all of the parties. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the complaint in this action be dismissed with prejudice and that judgment be and the same hereby is entered pursuant to the terms of this Order. Dated: February 27, 2009 ______________________________________ HON. MAXINE M. CHESNEY Judge, United States District Court Northern District of California

5
[PROPOSED] ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL Suon, et al. v. Alameda County, et al.: USDC, No. Dist., Case No. C 07-1770 MMC