Green et al v. Drake Beam Morin, Inc.
Filing
114
ORDER GRANTING PARTIES JOINT 113 MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND REQUEST FOR HEARING. Final Fairness Hearing set for 4/19/2013 at 01:30 PM in Courtroom A1001 before Judge Robert E. Blackburn. See order for further deadlines. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 2/13/13. (kfinn, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
Civil Case No.11-cv-01063-REB-CBS
JOHN GREEN, and
ELIZABETH ENRIGHT, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.
DRAKE BEAM MORIN, INC.,
Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING PARTIES’ JOINT MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND REQUEST FOR HEARING
_____________________________________________________________________________
Blackburn, J.
The matter before me is Plaintiffs’ Renewed Unopposed Motion To Approve
Collective Action Settlement and Memorandum in Support [#113],1 filed January 8,
2013. Having considered the Confidential Settlement Agreement and Release of
Claims (see [#103], Exh. A) (“Settlement Agreement”) reached among the proposed
Settlement Class representative plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of the proposed
Settlement Class, and the defendant, and being otherwise fully advised in the premises,
I grant the motion and enter appropriate findings, conclusions, and orders to implement
my ruling.
1
“[#113]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a specific paper
by the court’s electronic case filing and management system (CM/ECF). I use this convention throughout
this order.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That Plaintiffs’ Renewed Unopposed Motion To Approve Collective
Action Settlement and Memorandum in Support [#113],filed January 8, 2013, is
GRANTED.
2.
That the Settlement Agreement is incorporated by reference as if fully set
forth herein, and the definitions used in the Settlement Agreement are adopted for use
herein.
3.
That my ruling is based on federal common and statutory law, including 29
U.S.C. § 216(b) and the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as well as federal and other
authority, including the Federal Judicial Center's MANUAL FOR COMPLEX
LITIGATION (4th ed. 2004) and ANNOTATED MANUAL FOR COMPLEX LITIGATION
- FOURTH (2005).
4.
That the proposed Settlement Class, as conditionally certified by the court
and restated below, is appropriate for purposes of settling this case. All federal
statutory prerequisites, as well as the dictates of due process, are satisfied by
certification of this case. Specifically, the requirement of 29 U.S.C. § 216(b), requiring
that the class be "similarly situated," is satisfied.
5.
That the Settlement Class is numerous, and joinder therefore is
impractical. Common issues exist and predominate, including, for example and most
fundamentally, whether defendant unlawfully failed to compensate plaintiffs for regular
and overtime work as required by law. The Settlement Class representatives are
adequate, having vigorously prosecuted the underlying related action and having
2
retained adequate counsel. In addition, the claims of the Settlement Class
representatives are typical, in that they arise out of the same facts and circumstances
and give rise to the same legal claims as do the claims of all Class Members. The
matter, as postured for a settlement class, is manageable. In short, certification of this
Settlement Class will serve the interests of equity and judicial economy.
6.
That the Settlement Class is similarly situated, and the parties have so
stipulated for purposes of their settlement.
7.
That I have jurisdiction over the claims at issue in this action.
8.
That I have been advised by counsel for the aforesaid parties that a
Settlement Agreement has been reached.
9.
That the form of Class Notice, attached to the motion as Exhibit 2, is
constitutionally adequate, and is hereby approved with the corrections noted here. The
proposed form of Notice contains all essential elements necessary to satisfy federal
statutory requirements and due process, including: the nature of the action; the
definition of the Class; the class claims, issues, or defenses; the identities of the parties
and their counsel; the fact that a Class Member may appear through counsel; a
summary of the terms of the proposed Settlement and of Class Counsel's intention to
apply for fees; information regarding the manner in which objections may be submitted
and requests for exclusion may be filed; and the binding effect of a class judgment on
Class Members. The Notice also informs Class Members of the date and location of a
final fairness hearing and of Claims filing deadlines and procedures. Notice by mail to
the Class will be effectuated by Class Counsel acting as Notice and Claims
Administrator. Individual Settlement Payments will also be administered by Class
3
Counsel as Notice and Claims Administrator.
10.
That I approve the Notice Plan as described in the motion as the best
means practicable of providing notice under the circumstances. I hereby direct that
Notice be provided in accordance with the Settlement Agreement. The Notice will list
the objection and exclusion deadline as March 11, 2013. To be timely, objections and
exclusion requests must be post-marked and mailed by the above-listed deadline. The
final fairness hearing is scheduled for Friday, April 19, 2013, at 1:30 a.m.
11.
That any Class Member who files and serves a written objection to the
Settlement Agreement may appear at the final fairness hearing, either in person or
through counsel hired at the Class Member's expense. If a Class Member (or his or her
attorney) wishes to appear and speak at the final hearing, the Class Member (or his or
her attorney) must, no later than March 11, 2013: (a) file an original Notice of Intention
to Appear with the Clerk of the Court, and (b) deliver to Class counsel and defendant's
counsel a copy of the Notice of Intention to Appear.
12.
That the notice plan is approved and its implementation is hereby ordered.
13.
That I have reviewed the Settlement proposed by the parties and find that
it is without obvious deficiencies and that it is sufficiently fair, adequate, and reasonable
to warrant providing Notice to the Class of its terms. The proposed Settlement
Agreement between plaintiffs and defendant is hereby preliminarily approved as
sufficiently fair and reasonable to warrant providing notice to the Class of its terms.
14.
That the Settlement appears to have been the product of arm's-length
negotiation and to have been made in good faith.
4
15.
That I appoint the following Class Counsel to represent the Class
Members in this litigation: Jack McInnes, Esq., of Stueve Siegal Hanson, LLP, and Dan
Sloane, Esq., of Hillyard, Wahlberg, Kudla, Sloane & Woodruff, LLP. In appointing
Class Counsel, the court considered the work counsel has done in investigating and
prosecuting the underlying claims, as well as their experience in handling complex
litigation, counsel's knowledge of the applicable law, and their ability to commit the
resources necessary to adequately represent the Class.
16.
That John Green and Elizabeth Enright are hereby appointed as the Class
Representatives.
17.
That the Notice and Claims Administrator shall be Class Counsel.
18.
That the Settlement Agreement is not and shall not be deemed or
construed to be an admission or evidence of any violation of any statute or law or of any
liability or wrongdoing, or of the truth of any of the claims or allegations contained in the
Complaint, or any other pleadings, and the evidence thereof shall not be used directly or
indirectly, in any way, whether in the action or in any other action or proceeding.
Defendant's stipulation to certification of the Settlement Class shall not have any
bearing on or be admissible as evidence regarding the appropriateness of class
certification or any other issue of fact or law for litigation purposes.
19.
That the final fairness hearing date and all other dates provided for herein
may, from time to time and without further notice to the Class, be continued or
adjourned by order of the court.
20.
That if the Settlement Agreement does not become effective in
accordance with the Settlement Agreement, or if the Settlement Agreement is not finally
5
approved or is canceled, terminated, or fails to become effective for any reason, this
Order shall be rendered null and void and shall be vacated.
Dated February 13, 2013, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:
6
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?