Morris et al v. Aegis Senior Communities, LLC

Filing 35

ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS- AND COLLECTIVE-ACTION SETTLEMENT. Signed by Judge Maxine M. Chesney on January 17, 2012. (mmclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/17/2012)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

Alan Harris (SBN 146079)
David Zelenski (SBN 231768)
HARRIS & RUBLE
6424 Santa Monica Boulevard
Los Angeles, California 90038
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 323.962.3004
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
David S. Harris (SBN 215224)
NORTH BAY LAW GROUP
116 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 2
Mill Valley, California 94941
Telephone: [phone]
Facsimile: 415.388.8770
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs

11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13
14
15
16
17
18

TAMARAH R. SEIELSTAD, individually Case No. 09-01797 MMC
and on behalf of all others similarly
situated,
PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS- AND
Plaintiff,
COLLECTIVE-ACTION
SETTLEMENT
v.
Assigned to Hon. Maxine M. Chesney
AEGIS SENIOR COMMUNITIES, LLC,
Defendant.

19
20

KENNYON MORRIS, et al.,

21
22
23
24
25

Case No. 10-2060 MMC
Assigned to Hon. Maxine M. Chesney

Plaintiffs,
v.
AEGIS SENIOR COMMUNITIES, LLC,
Defendant.

Date: September 30, 2011
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Place: Courtroom 7, 450 Golden Gate
Avenue, San Francisco, California 94102

26
27
28
1
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL

1

This matter came before the Court for hearing on September 30, 2011, pursuant to

2

the April 15, 2011, Order Preliminarily Approving Class- and Collective-Action

3

Settlement, Conditionally Certifying Settlement Class, Approving Form of Notice, and

4

Scheduling a Fairness Hearing (“Preliminary Approval Order”). Due and adequate notice

5

having been given to the Classes as defined in and required by the Preliminary Approval

6

Order, the Court having considered all papers filed and otherwise being fully informed,

7

and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

8
9
10
11

1.

All capitalized terms used herein (unless otherwise indicated) shall have the

same meaning as defined in the Joint Stipulation and Settlement Agreement and Release
of Claims (“Settlement” or “Settlement Agreement”).
2.

The two Settlement Classes conditionally certified in the Preliminary

12

Approval Order are confirmed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 and to 29

13

U.S.C. § 216(b). Specifically, Settlement Class A consists of all current and former non-

14

exempt, hourly paid California employees of Defendant performing care-manager duties

15

in the position of lead care manager, care manager, medical care manager, and medical

16

technician from April 24, 2005, to and including April 15, 2011; Settlement Class B

17

consists of all former California employees of Defendant who were terminated from

18

Defendant’s employment between the time period April 24, 2005, to and including April

19

15, 2011.

20

3.

This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of each of the claims

21

asserted in the operative Complaints in the above-captioned actions, as well as personal

22

jurisdiction over the parties to those actions, including the Settlement Class Members.

23

4.

Notice to the Settlement Class, including both (a) the mailing of the Class

24

Notice and Claim Form as set forth in the Settlement and (b) the establishment of a

25

website by the Claims Administrator, has been completed in conformity with the

26

Preliminary Approval Order. The Court finds that this notice was the best notice

27

practicable under the circumstances, that it provided due and adequate notice of the

28

proceedings and of the matters set forth therein, and that it fully satisfies the requirements
2
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL

1

of law and due process. The Court bases this finding, in part, on the Claims

2

Administrator’s extensive efforts not only in initially mailing Class Notice and Claim

3

Forms to Class Members, but in re-mailing undelivered Class Notices and Claim Forms

4

to Class Members, utilizing a third-party locator service to update Class Members’

5

addresses, receiving and responding to telephone calls from inquiring Class Members,

6

and maintaining the website containing information about the case.

7

5.

The Court hereby approves the Settlement, including the Individual

8

Settlement Payments to be made to Settlement Class Members who filed claims and the

9

release specified in the Settlement. The Court finds that the Settlement is, in all respects,

10

fair, reasonable, and adequate to the Settling Parties, including the Representative

11

Plaintiffs and the Settlement Class. The Court also finds that the Settlement Class is

12

properly certified as a class for purposes of this Settlement and that relief with respect to

13

the Settlement Class as a whole is appropriate.

14

6.

In making the determination that the Settlement is fair, reasonable, and

15

adequate, the Court has considered (a) the strengths and weaknesses in Plaintiffs’ case,

16

including the presence of substantial issues in dispute; (b) the risks, expense, complexity,

17

and likely duration of further litigation; (c) the risks to Plaintiffs of establishing and

18

maintaining class-action status; (d) the monetary amount of the Settlement, including the

19

amounts of the Individual Settlement Payments; (e) the extent of both formal and

20

informal discovery that has been conducted by the parties; and (f) the views of the

21

Settling Parties’ respective counsel, both of whom are experienced in complex class-

22

action litigation of this nature. Furthermore, this Court notes that not a single objection

23

was filed to the Settlement and that only six individuals elected to exclude themselves.

24

These additional factors lead the Court to conclude that the Settlement is fair, reasonable,

25

adequate, and supported by the Class.

26

7.

As of the date of final approval of the Settlement, each and every Released

27

Claim (as defined in the Settlement Agreement) of every Settlement Class Member who

28

did not timely exclude himself or herself from the Settlement is conclusively released as
3
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL

1

to the Released Parties. Accordingly, only those six individuals identified by the Claims

2

Administrator as having requested exclusion from the Settlement shall be deemed to have

3

properly requested exclusion. The six excluded individuals are specifically identified on

4

the opt-out forms attached hereto as Exhibit A. Other than these individuals, all

5

Settlement Class Members are permanently enjoined and restrained from commencing or

6

prosecuting any released claims in any jurisdiction or court against the Released Parties.

7

8.

The Settlement does not constitute an admission or concession by

8

Defendant, nor does this Order or the Judgment that accompanies it constitute a finding

9

of any kind as to the validity of any claims asserted in the operative Complaints or of any

10

wrongdoing on the part of Defendant. Furthermore, the Settlement shall not be used in

11

any way or for any purpose as an admission of any fault, omission, or wrongdoing on the

12

part of Defendant. Accordingly, neither the Settlement nor any of the negotiations or

13

proceedings related thereto shall be considered as, or deemed to be evidence of, a

14

concession or admission with regard to the denials or defenses of Defendant. Likewise,

15

neither the Settlement nor any of the negotiations or proceedings related thereto shall be

16

offered in evidence in any action or proceeding against Defendant in any court,

17

administrative agency, or other tribunal for any purpose whatsoever other than to enforce

18

the provisions of this Order, the Judgment, or the Settlement.

19

9.

Alan Harris and David Zelenski of the firm of Harris & Ruble, along with

20

David Harris of North Bay Law Group, having been appointed as Class Counsel by the

21

Preliminary Approval Order, are hereby confirmed as Class Counsel. Class Counsel have

22

adequately represented the Settlement Class herein. Similarly, Tamarah Seielstad,

23

Kennyon Morris, and Karen Jiron, all of whom had been appointed as Representative

24

Plaintiffs by the Preliminary Approval Order, are confirmed as Representative Plaintiffs,

25

having adequately represented the Settlement Class herein.

26

10.

In accordance with the Settlement, Class Counsel have requested that the

27

Representative Plaintiffs receive Enhancement Payments as follows: $15,000 to Plaintiff

28

Seielstad, $5,000 to Plaintiff Morris, and $5,000 to Plaintiff Jiron. The Court hereby
4
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL

1

awards them the requested amounts based on its finding that the amounts awarded are

2

reasonable under the circumstances.

3

11.

Pursuant to the Settlement, Class Counsel have requested an award of

4

attorney’s fees and costs in the amount of $312,648.55, consisting of fees in the amount

5

of $300,000.00 and costs in the amount of $12,648.55. The requested awards of fees and

6

costs are granted, based on the Court’s findings that the amounts requested are fair and

7

reasonable under the circumstances, are supported by sufficient records, and are

8

supported by the lodestar crosscheck. The Court also awards the Claims Administrator

9

its costs and fees in the requested amount of $36,435.61.

10

12.

In accordance with the accompanying Judgment, the Court hereby dismisses

11

this action against Defendant on the merits and with prejudice and without costs other

12

than as provided in the Settlement.

13

13.

Without affecting the finality of this Order or the Judgment in any way, the

14

Court hereby retains continuing jurisdiction over (a) the implementation of the

15

Settlement, (b) the payment of the amount of reasonable attorney’s fees and costs to be

16

awarded to Class Counsel as provided in the Settlement, and (c) all Parties hereto for the

17

purpose of enforcing and administering the Settlement.

18

IT IS SO ORDERED.

19
20
21

DATED: January 17, 2012
U.S. District Court Judge

22
23
24
25
26
27
28
5
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL

y,//d

Gilardi ClaimID
SLSTAD120018576
SLSTAD120019734
SLSTAD130001013
SLSTAD130019877
SLSTAD120018703
SLSTAD120000138

FirstName
CYNTHIA
DEBORAH
FABIOLA
SHANNON
CECILIA
CHRISTINE

LastName
CAMPBELL
CHESTER
HEINDEL
MASSEY
OJEDA DE POLO
SCHOONVELD

City
PASO ROBLES
INDIO
PLEASANT HILL
PACIFICA
IRVINE
SACRAMENTO

Exclusions Received as of September 16, 2011

Case Name - Seielstad v. Aegis Senior Communities LLC

Case Administration Statistics - CONFIDENTIAL

State
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA
CA

OptOut
8/24/2011
8/29/2011
7/18/2011
6/10/2011
6/10/2011
6/29/2011