Hall et al v. Housing Authority of the County of Marin

Filing 72

ORDER by Judge Richard Seeborg granting 69 order shortening time for hearing motion for preliminary approval of settlement. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/7/2014)

1
2
3
4
5
6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

7

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

8

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

9

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10
JACQUELYN HALL, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

12
13
14

v.
HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE
COUNTY OF MARIN,

ORDER SHORTENING TIME FOR
HEARING MOTION FOR
PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF
SETTLEMENT

Defendant.

15
16

No. C 12-4922 RS

____________________________________/

17
18

Plaintiffs’ request1 for an order permitting their motion for preliminary settlement approval

19

to be heard on shortened time is granted. The motion will be heard on May 15, 2014, at 1:30 p.m.

20

The request to have “preliminary” approval of the request for attorney fees heard on the same

21

shortened schedule is denied, on grounds that “preliminary” approval of fee requests is neither

22

required nor appropriate. Although the anticipated amount of fees that will be claimed, and any

23

agreement between the parties relating thereto, are among the factors that may be considered in

24
1

25
26
27
28

Although plaintiffs labeled their request as an “ex parte application,” it was filed through the ECF
system, and therefore was not presented on an ex parte basis, which would not have been warranted
in any event. See Civil Local Rule 7-10 (“a party may file an ex parte motion, that is, a motion filed
without notice to opposing party, only if a statute, Federal Rule, local rule or Standing Order
authorizes the filing of an ex parte motion in the circumstances and the party has complied with the
applicable provisions allowing the party to approach the Court on an ex parte basis.”) The request
will be deemed a motion to change time, properly brought under Rule 6-3.

1

preliminarily weighing the fairness and adequacy of the settlement, the fees are not subject to

2

separate preliminary approval. In the event preliminary approval of the settlement is granted,

3

plaintiffs may refile their “preliminary” fee motion as an ordinary motion for a fee award, to be

4

heard on the same date as the final settlement approval hearing.

5
6

IT IS SO ORDERED.

7
8
9

Dated: 5/7/14
RICHARD SEEBORG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

11
For the Northern District of California

United States District Court

10

12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

2