Williams, et al v. City of Antioch, et al

Filing 234

ORDER OF DISMISSAL re 232 Joint MOTION to Approve Consent Judgment In Support of Final Approval of Settlement filed by Priscilla Bunton, Mary Ruth Scott, Karen Latreece Coleman, Alyce Denise Payne, City of Antioch, Santeya Danyell Williams. Signed by Judge ARMSTRONG on 4/3/12. (lrc, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/6/2012)

Download PDF
1 (Counsel listed on next page) 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 8 9 SANTEYA DANYELL WILLIAMS, MARY No. C-08-2301 SBA RUTH SCOTT, KAREN LATREECE COLEMAN, PRISCILLA BUNTON, and DISMISSAL ORDER ALYCE DENISE PAYNE, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF ANTIOCH, Defendant. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Impact Fund BRAD SELIGMAN (SBN 083838) bseligman@impactfund.org JOCELYN D. LARKIN (SBN 110817) 125 University Avenue, Suite 102 Berkeley, CA 94710 Telephone: 510.845.3473 Facsimile: 510.845.3654 McNamara, Ney, Beatty, Slattery, Borges & Ambacher THOMAS G. BEATTY (SBN 75794) JAMES V. FITZGERALD, III (SBN 55632) 1211 Newell Avenue, P.O. Box 5288 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Telephone: 925.939.5530 Facsimile: 925.939.0203 Bingham McCutchen LLP FRANK B. KENNAMER (SBN 157844) Three Embarcadero Center San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: 415.393.2000 Facsimile: 415.393.2286 Attorneys for Defendant CITY OF ANTIOCH Lawyers’ Committee For Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area OREN M. SELLSTROM (SBN 161074) 131 Steuart Street, Suite 400 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: 415.543.9444 American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Northern California ALAN L. SCHLOSSER (SBN 49957) 39 Drumm Street San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: 415.621.2493 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Public Advocates, Inc. RICHARD A. MARCANTONIO (SBN 139619) 131 Steuart Street, Suite 300 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: 415.431.7430 Covington & Burling LLP HAYWOOD S. GILLIAM, JR. (SBN 172732) hgilliam@cov.com One Front Street San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: 415.591.6000 Facsimile: 415.591.6091 25 Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Certified Class 26 27 28 1 1 2 WHEREAS, on January 6, 2012, Magistrate Judge Corley granted preliminary 3 4 5 6 7 approval of the settlement of this action, embodied in the Settlement Agreement, attached as Appendix 1 to the Joint Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement; WHEREAS, on March 8, 2012, Magistrate Judge Corley issued a Report and Recommendation finding that the settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate in all 8 9 10 11 12 respects within the meaning of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e) and applicable law, and thus recommended that the Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement be granted; WHEREAS, Magistrate Judge Corley has found that the notice sent to the Class Members fairly and adequately informed the Class of the terms of the settlement, was 13 14 consistent with Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e) and due process, and was given in the manner 15 prescribed by the Settlement Agreement and the Court’s order preliminarily approving 16 the settlement; 17 WHEREAS, on April 2, 2012, this Court issued an order Accepting Magistrate 18 19 20 Judge Corley’s Report and Recommendation recommending that the Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement be granted: 21 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT: 22 1. In accordance with the Settlement Agreement, this Court hereby enters final 23 judgment in this action, and dismisses this action with prejudice. 24 25 26 2. The Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the settlement for three years following the entry of the Final Approval Order. The Court appoints Magistrate Judge 27 28 2 1 2 Corley to consider any claims alleging a violation of the Agreement. IT IS SO ORDERED 3 4 5 Dated: 4/3/12 _________________________________________________ SAUNDRA BROWN ARMSTRONG United States District Court 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3

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?