Bias et al v. Wells Fargo & Company et al

Filing 274

FINAL APPROVAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers on 4/13/17. (fs, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/13/2017)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA — OAKLAND DIVISION

10
11 LATARA BIAS, ERIC BREAUX, and TROY
LYNNE MORRISON, individually, and on
12 behalf of other members of the general public
similarly situated,
13
Plaintiffs,
14
vs.
15
WELLS FARGO & COMPANY, a Delaware
16 corporation, and WELLS FARGO BANK,
N.A., a national association,
17
Defendants.
18

Case No. 4:12-cv-00664-YGR
[PROPOSED] FINAL APPROVAL
ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF
DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4:12-cv-00664-YGR
FINAL APPROVAL ORDER

WHEREAS, the Court is advised that the Parties,1 through their counsel, have agreed,

1

2 subject to Court approval following notice to the Class and a hearing, to settle this Action (the
3 “Action”) upon the terms and conditions set forth in the Settlement Agreement (the
4 “Settlement”) which was filed with the Court, and all capitalized terms used herein having the
5 meanings defined in the Settlement; and
6

WHEREAS, the Court entered its Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement and

7 Providing for Notice, setting forth the previously certified Class for settlement purposes only
8 and preliminarily approved Notice of Settlement to the Class (including notice of the proposed
9 Settlement and of a fairness hearing thereon), and said notice has been made, along with notice
10 pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1715 provided to the appropriate regulators, and the fairness hearing has
11 been held;
12

NOW, THEREFORE, based upon the Settlement and all of the filings, records, and

13 proceedings herein, and it appearing to the Court upon examination that the Settlement is fair,
14 reasonable, and adequate, and upon a Settlement Fairness Hearing having been held after Notice
15 to the Class of the proposed Settlement to determine if the terms of the Settlement are fair,
16 reasonable, and adequate and whether a Final Judgment of Dismissal with Prejudice (“Final
17 Judgment”) should be entered in this Action based upon the Settlement;
18

THE COURT HEREBY FINDS AND CONCLUDES THAT:

19

A.

The provisions of the Settlement, including definitions of the terms used therein,

20 are hereby incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein.
21

B.

This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this Action and all of the

22 Parties and all Class Members.
23

C.

On December 17, 2015, the Court granted-in-part and denied-in-part Plaintiffs’

24 motion for class certification. The Court amended the class definition on March 7, 2016.
25
1

As used herein, the term “Parties” means Plaintiffs Latara Bias, Eric Breaux and Troy
Lynne Morrison (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) on behalf of themselves and the Class (defined below),
27 and Defendants Wells Fargo & Co. and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (collectively, “Wells Fargo” or
“Defendants”).
28
26

1

4:12-cv-00664-YGR
FINAL APPROVAL ORDER

1

D.

Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and for the purposes

2 of the Settlement only, the Court hereby adopts and reaffirms the Class set forth in its March 7,
3 2016 Order as the Settlement Class in this Action, as follows: “All residents of the United States
4 of America who had a residential mortgage serviced by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., or its
5 subsidiaries or divisions, and who paid for one or more Broker’s Price Opinions charged by Wells
6 Fargo (through PAS), for an amount greater than the amount Wells Fargo (through PAS) paid a
7 third party vendor for the corresponding [BPO], from May 6, 2005 through July 1, 2010.”
8 Excluded from the Settlement Class are Defendants, any entity in which a Defendant has a
9 controlling interest or is a parent or subsidiary of, or any entity that is controlled by a Defendant,
10 and any of Defendants’ officers, directors, employees, affiliates, legal representatives, heirs,
11 predecessors, successors, and assigns.

Also excluded from the Settlement Class are Class

12 Members who provided valid and timely notice to exclude themselves or Opt-Out of this Action
13 by the deadline.
14

E.

For all of the reasons set forth in this Court’s Orders dated December 17, 2015 and

15 March 7, 2016, and solely for purposes of effectuating the Settlement, the Court finds that (i) the
16 members of the Settlement Class are so numerous that joinder of all Settlement Class Members in
17 the Action would be impracticable; (ii) there are questions of law and fact common to the
18 Settlement Class that predominate over individual questions; (iii) the claims of Plaintiffs are
19 typical of the claims of the Settlement Class; (iv) Plaintiffs and Class Counsel can fairly and
20 adequately represent and protect the interests of Settlement Class Members; and ( v) a class action
21 is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy,
22 considering the interests of the Settlement Class Members in individually controlling the
23 prosecution of separate actions, the extent and nature of any litigation concerning the controversy
24 already commenced by Settlement Class Members, the desirability or undesirability of continuing
25 the litigation of these claims in this particular forum, and the difficulties likely to be encountered
26 in the management of a class action.
27

F.

Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court hereby

28 certifies, solely for purposes of effectuating the Settlement and for no other purpose, Plaintiffs
2

4:12-cv-00664-YGR
FINAL APPROVAL ORDER

1 Latara Bias, Eric Breaux and Troy Lynne Morrison as Class Representatives, and appoints the law
2 firms of Baron & Budd, P.C.; Cossich, Sumich, Parsiola and Taylor; and Kingsmill Riess, LLC as
3 Class Counsel.
4

G.

The form, content, and method of dissemination of Notice of Settlement given to

5 the Settlement Class was adequate and reasonable and constituted the best notice practicable
6 under the circumstances, including both individual notice to all Settlement Class Members who
7 could be identified through reasonable effort and publication notice.
8

H.

Notice of Settlement, as given, complied with the requirements of Rule 23 of the

9 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, satisfied the requirements of due process, and constituted due
10 and sufficient notice of the matters set forth herein.
11

I.

Notice of the Settlement was provided to the appropriate regulators pursuant to

12 the Class Action Fairness Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1715(c)(1).
13

J.

The Settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate and in the best interests of the

14 Settlement Class.
15

i.

The Settlement was negotiated vigorously and at arm’s-length by

16

Plaintiffs and their experienced counsel on behalf of the Settlement Class.

17

The case settled only after: (a) several failed attempts at resolution and

18

with the assistance of a retired U.S. District Court Judge; (b) extensive

19

briefing on multiple motions, including Wells Fargo’s motions to dismiss

20

filed June 15, 2012 and August 7, 2012, Plaintiffs’ motion for class

21

certification filed June 9, 2015, and Wells Fargo’s motion for summary

22

judgment, filed April 5, 2016, which was fully briefed, argued, submitted

23

and pending as of the Settlement was reached; (c) the Parties engaged in

24

extensive discovery, including production by Wells Fargo of electronically

25

stored information, additional voluminous data, and over 124,000 pages of

26

documents; (d) the Parties exchanged reports from six expert witness, and

27

took depositions of the six expert witnesses and over twenty fact witnesses.

28

Accordingly, both the Plaintiffs and Defendants were well positioned to
3

4:12-cv-00664-YGR
FINAL APPROVAL ORDER

1

evaluate the settlement value of this Action. The Settlement has been

2

entered into in good faith and is not collusive.

3

ii.

If the Settlement had not been achieved, both Plaintiffs and Defendants

4

faced the expense, risk, and uncertainty of extended litigation. The Court

5

takes no position on the merits of either Plaintiffs’ or Defendants’

6

arguments, but notes these arguments as evidence in support of the

7

reasonableness of the Settlement.

8

K.

Plaintiffs, all Settlement Class Members, and Defendants are hereby bound by the

9 terms of the Settlement.
10

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

11

1.

The Settlement is approved as final, fair, reasonable and adequate.

The

12 Settlement shall be consummated in accordance with its terms and provisions.
13

2.

The Action and all claims that are or have ever been contained therein, as well as

14 all of the Released Claims, are dismissed with prejudice as to the Plaintiffs, the Settlement Class
15 Members, and all other Releasing Parties. The Parties are to bear their own costs, except as
16 otherwise provided in the Settlement.
17

3.

Wells Fargo and all Released Parties as defined in the Settlement are released in

18 accordance with, and as defined in, the Settlement.
19

4.

Upon the Effective Date of this Settlement, Plaintiffs and all Settlement Class

20 Members, on behalf of themselves and each of the Releasing Parties shall be deemed to have, and
21 by operation of this Final Judgment shall have, fully, finally, and forever waived, released,
22 relinquished, and discharged all Released Claims against Wells Fargo and the Released Parties,
23 regardless of whether such Settlement Class Member cashes a settlement check.
24

5.

All Settlement Class Members who have not made their objections to the

25 Settlement in the manner provided in the Notice of Settlement are deemed to have waived any
26 objections by appeal, collateral attack, or otherwise.
27

6.

All Settlement Class Members who failed to properly file requests to be excluded

28 from the Class, or Opt-Out, by the Opt-Out Deadline are bound by the terms and conditions of
4

4:12-cv-00664-YGR
FINAL APPROVAL ORDER

1 the Settlement and this Final Judgment and release and forever discharge the Released Parties
2 from all Released Claims as provided in the Settlement and herein. A list of the 78 Persons who
3 validly and timely filed a request for exclusion or Opt-Out is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
4

7.

Class Counsel are hereby awarded attorneys’ fees of $12.5 million ($12,500,000)

5 out of the Settlement Fund, which sum the Court finds to be fair and reasonable, and $1.5 million
6 ($1,500,000) in reimbursement of expenses out of the Settlement Fund. The aforementioned
7 attorneys’ fees shall be allocated by Class Counsel in a manner which in their good faith judgment
8 reflects each counsel’s contribution to the institution, prosecution, and resolution of the Action.
9

8.

In making this award of attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of expenses to be paid

10 from the Settlement Fund, the Court has considered and found that:
11

(a)

The Settlement has resulted in the payment of $50,000,000 in cash, on which

12 interest has accrued, and that Settlement Class Members will benefit from the Settlement;
13

(b)

Over 288,000 copies of the Notice of Settlement were disseminated to Settlement

14 Class Members indicating that Class Counsel were moving for attorneys’ fees in the amount of up
15 to $12,500,000 out of the Settlement Fund, and for Service Awards of up to $10,000 along with
16 reimbursement of expenses in an amount of up to $1,500,000 out of the Settlement Fund, and no
17 objections were filed against the terms of the proposed Settlement or the ceiling on the fees and
18 expenses requested by Class Counsel contained in the Notice of Settlement;
19

(c)

The Action involves complex factual and legal issues, was actively prosecuted and,

20 in the absence of a settlement, would involve further lengthy proceedings with uncertain resolution
21 of the complex factual and legal issues;
22

(d)

Had Class Counsel not achieved the Settlement, there would remain a significant

23 risk that Plaintiffs and the Settlement Class may have recovered less or nothing from the
24 Defendants; and
25

(e)

The amount of attorneys’ fees awarded and expenses reimbursed from the

26 Settlement Fund are consistent with awards in similar cases.
27

10.

The Court finds that an award to Plaintiffs for their time and efforts in representing

28 the Class in the prosecution of this Action is fair and reasonable, and thus awards each of the
5

4:12-cv-00664-YGR
FINAL APPROVAL ORDER

1 Plaintiffs $10 thousand ($10,000) out of the Settlement Fund. Each of the Plaintiffs was deposed,
2 responded to written discovery, produced documents, and oversaw the prosecution of this Action
3 by their counsel.
4

11.

All other provisions of the Settlement are incorporated into this Final Judgment as

5 if fully rewritten herein. To the extent that the terms of this Final Judgment conflict with the terms
6 of the Settlement, the Settlement shall control.
7

12.

Plaintiffs, all Class Members, and all other Releasing Parties are hereby BARRED

8 AND PERMANENTLY ENJOINED from instituting, commencing, maintaining, or prosecuting
9 in any court or tribunal any of the Released Claims against Wells Fargo or any of the Released
10 Parties.
11

13.

The Court hereby decrees that neither the Settlement nor this Final Judgment nor

12 the fact of the Settlement is an admission or concession by Wells Fargo or the Released Parties, or
13 any of them, of any liability or wrongdoing. This Final Judgment is not a finding of the validity or
14 invalidity of any of the claims asserted or defenses raised in the Action. Neither the Settlement
15 nor this Final Judgment nor the fact of Settlement nor the settlement proceedings nor the
16 settlement negotiations nor any related documents shall be offered or received in evidence as an
17 admission, concession, presumption, or inference against Wells Fargo or any of the Released
18 Parties in any proceeding, other than such proceedings as may be necessary to consummate or
19 enforce the Settlement, or in an action or proceeding to determine the availability, scope, or extent
20 of insurance coverage (or reinsurance related to such coverage) for the sums expended for the
21 Settlement and defense of this Action.
22

14.

The Action is dismissed with prejudice; subject, however, to this Court retaining

23 jurisdiction over compliance with the Settlement and this Final Judgment.
24

15.

The Court hereby bars all future claims for contribution arising out of the Action or

25 the Released Claims by any Person against the Released Parties.
26

16.

Nothing in this Final Judgment constitutes or reflects a waiver, release or discharge

27 of any rights or claims of Wells Fargo or the Released Parties against their insurers, or their
28 insurers’ subsidiaries, predecessors, successors, assigns, affiliates, or representatives. Nothing in
6

4:12-cv-00664-YGR
FINAL APPROVAL ORDER

1 this Final Judgment constitutes or reflects a waiver or release of any rights or claims relating to
2 indemnification, advancement, or any undertakings by an indemnified party to repay amounts
3 advanced or paid by way of indemnification or otherwise.
4

17.

In the event that the Settlement is terminated in accordance with its terms, (i) this

5 Final Judgment shall be rendered null and void and shall be vacated nunc pro tunc, and (ii) this
6 Action shall proceed as provided in the Settlement.
7

18.

There is no just reason for delay, and this is a final, appealable order as of when it

8 is stamped as received for filing.
9

19.

Final judgment shall be entered herein.

10 IT IS SO ORDERED.
11
12
13

April 13
Dated: ________________, 2017

__________________________________________
HONORABLE YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
7

4:12-cv-00664-YGR
FINAL APPROVAL ORDER

Exhibit 1

Bias v. Wells Fargo Bank Settlement
Case No.: 4:12‐cv‐00664‐YGR  
Exhibit 1 
Exclusion Requests 

1  DAVID 
2  KIMBERLY 
3  BRENDA 

Middle Name 
1 
C 
A 
G 

4  ANNETTE 

First Name 1 

Last Name 1 

First Name 
2 
LINDA 

Middle Name 
2 
L 

Last Name 
2 
TOURJE 

MARY 

NANETTE 

ERIC 

PATRICIA 

SHARON 

H 

D 

L 

L 

GULLETT 

FINN 

BYRD 

LIKENS 

GDOVICAK 

VALDERRA
MA 
MANISCAL
CO 

DISPOTO 

THOMANN 
SR 

HOFFMAN 
DALEY 

C 
E 

C 
A 
M 

C 

J 

TOURJE 
HEFFNER 
NICKS 
GRIFFIS‐
CARTER 
ANGERS 
GULLETT 
VEITEL 
FINN 
NELSON 
BYRD 
FREEMAN SR 
ORTIZ 
WILLIAMS 
LIKENS 
ROJAS 
BRITT 
GDOVICAK 
SILVEIRA 

19  YOHISI 

VALDERRAMA JAMIE 

MANUEL 

20  CARLO 

P 

CASAGRANDE  LISA 

A 

21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 

JAIME 
OSCAR 
VICTORIA 
RUBEN 
PAULA 
JAMES 

J 

A 

ABREGO 
LLAMAS 
DISPOTO 
HURTADO 
RICE 
SMITH 

MARK 

J 

27  MICHELLE 

A 

THOMANN 

DONALD 

G 

28 
29 
30 
31 

M 
L 
I 

SPAID 
HOFFMAN 
SATRE 
NICK 

VIRGINIA 
BONITA 

E 
SATRE 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 
13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 

MARY 
JAMES 
BETTY 
NOEL 
CLOVIS 
DENISE 
SIDNEY 
THERESA 
MARGARET 
JOSEPH 
RODOLFO 
REESHEMA 
WILLIAM 
RODRIGO 

DANA 
GARY 
RODRICK 
ESTATE OF STELLA 

Bias v. Wells Fargo Bank Settlement
Case No.: 4:12‐cv‐00664‐YGR  
Exhibit 1 
Exclusion Requests 

First Name 1 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 

DEBRA 
BARBARA 
BALJIT 
DAVID 
MICHAEL 

Middle Name 
1 
ANN 
J 
KAUR 
L 
M 

37  NAHYOH 

F 

38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 
45 
46 
47 
48 
49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 
57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 
65 

A 
T 
R 

G 
A 
C 
J 
E 
G 
C 

MARION 
R 

M 

E 

C 
KATHLEEN 
E 
M 
B 

J 
S 
C 

JEFFREY 
MYRNA 
PATRICIA 
JOHNIE 
ETHAN 
RAMON 
HARRIET 
JEREMY 
RICHARD 
ESTATE OF ELAINE 
TRENT 
GLEN 
RONALD 
MARK 
LIBIA 
SHARON 
BRENDAN 
WILLIE 
PATRICK 
LESLEY 
MARCIA 
GRACE 
JUAN 
WILLIAM 
ANTHONY 
STEPHEN 
JANET 
MATHEW 

Last Name 1 
TAYLOR 
SEPANSKI 
SRAN 
GUNTER 
RAMOS 
BASHUI‐
GOFFE 
BENNETT 
THOMAS 
WILSON 
WARD 
SIDES 
SANCHEZ 
DANIELS 
NEITZEL 
MAY 
PARKINSON 
HARGRAVE 
BARNES 
BALL 
MOTELL 
QUILES 
HEATON 
DONNELLY 
MCCAIN 
DOHERTY 
EMERY‐HALL 
HOLMAN 
EBEYER 
SANCHEZ 
STOKES 
GIRDANO 
LECHNIR 
TILLEY 
RUBY 

First Name 
2 

ALAN 
AMARJIT 

RIZALINA 

Middle Name 
2 

F 
SINGH 

S 

Last Name 
2 

SEPANSKI 
SRAN 

RAMOS 

MICHELLE 
BERTRAM 

ROSEMARY 

CATHRYN 

CAROLYN 
BARBARA 

VIRGIE 
TIMOTHY 

NORMA 
ROSEMARY 
MARGARET
ELISSA 
JOHN 
CAROLYN 

L 
J 

L 

M 

F 

M 
S 
D 
I 

BENNETT 
THOMAS 

BAREFIELD 

NEITZEL 

HARGRAVE 
BARNES 

MCCAIN 
DOHERTY 

SANCHEZ 
STOKES 
GIRDANO 
LECHNIR 
TILLEY 
RUBY 

Bias v. Wells Fargo Bank Settlement
Case No.: 4:12‐cv‐00664‐YGR  
Exhibit 1 
Exclusion Requests 

First Name 1 
66 
67 
68 
69 

STEVEN 
THERESA 
STEFANIE 
RICHARD 

Middle Name 
1 
E 

M 
T 

Last Name 1 
WILSON 
MARSHALL 
TAVERNA 
TUCCI 

70  VICTORIA 

A 

OWEN 

71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 
77 
78 

J 
W 
R 
B 

W 

PIERCE 
COX 
MEE 
JONES 
CHAVERA 
DOBBS 
BARRAZA 
MILIAN 

LEROY 
JIMMY 
GLENN 
AURORA 
MARGARITO 
JACOB 
MARIA 
JAVIER 

First Name 
2 
LORA 

JACQUELIN
E 
DIANNE 

Middle Name 
2 
A 

Last Name 
2 
WILSON 

M 

OWEN 

PIERCE