Turner v. Rosen Hotels and Resorts, Inc.

Filing 49

It is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 46) is ADOPTED and made a part of this Order. The Joint Motion for Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement Agreement (Doc. 42) is GRANTED in part and DEFERRED inpart. Insofar as the Motion seeks approval of a service award to Plaintiff, ruling is DEFERRED pending a decision on the petition for rehearing en banc in Johnson v. NPAS Solutions, LLC, 975 F.3d 1244, 1260 (11th Cir. 2020). Plaintiff shall notify t he Court within fourteen days of an issuance of that ruling and the funds shall remain in escrow until further order of this Court. The Settlement Agreement (Doc. 43-1) is PRELIMINARILY APPROVED. The Notice set forth in the Settlement Agreement and the exhibits thereto are APPROVED. The Parties shall adhere to the deadlines set forth in the Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Class is PROVISIONALLY CERTIFIED. Class members may opt-out or object to the Settlement Agreement pursuant to the proc edures and deadlines set forth in the Settlement Agreement (Doc. 43-1 8-9). The law firms of Lankenau & Miller, LLP, The Gardner Firm, P.C. and Wenzel Fenton & Cabassa, P.A. are designated as class counsel. A final settlement approval hearing is set for Wednesday, October 5, 2022, at 9:30 AM in Courtroom 5B. Class Counsel shall file a motion for attorney's fees and costs no later than fourteen days before the objection deadline for class members. All deadlines other than those related to the Settlement remain STAYED. Signed by Judge Carlos E. Mendoza on 8/2/2022. (ALL)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION YOLANDA TURNER, Plaintiff, v. Case No. 6:21-cv-161-CEM-DAB ROSEN HOTELS AND RESORTS, INC., Defendant. / ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Joint Motion for Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement Agreement (Doc. 42). The United States Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 46), recommending that the Motion be granted in part and deferred in part. After review in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, and noting that the parties filed a Joint Notice of Non-Objection (Doc. 47), the Magistrate Judge’s recommended disposition is accepted. Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 46) is ADOPTED and made a part of this Order. Page 1 of 3 2. The Joint Motion for Order Preliminarily Approving Settlement Agreement (Doc. 42) is GRANTED in part and DEFERRED in part. 3. Insofar as the Motion seeks approval of a service award to Plaintiff, ruling is DEFERRED pending a decision on the petition for rehearing en banc in Johnson v. NPAS Solutions, LLC, 975 F.3d 1244, 1260 (11th Cir. 2020). Plaintiff shall notify the Court within fourteen days of an issuance of that ruling and the funds shall remain in escrow until further order of this Court. 4. The Settlement Agreement (Doc. 43-1) is PRELIMINARILY APPROVED. 5. The Notice set forth in the Settlement Agreement and the exhibits thereto are APPROVED. 6. The Parties shall adhere to the deadlines set forth in the Settlement Agreement. 7. The Settlement Class is PROVISIONALLY CERTIFIED. Class members may opt-out or object to the Settlement Agreement pursuant to the procedures and deadlines set forth in the Settlement Agreement (Doc. 43-1 ¶¶ 8–9). Page 2 of 3 8. The law firms of Lankenau & Miller, LLP, The Gardner Firm, P.C. and Wenzel Fenton & Cabassa, P.A. are designated as class counsel. 9. A final settlement approval hearing is set for Wednesday, October 5, 2022, at 9:30 AM in Courtroom 5B. 10. Class Counsel shall file a motion for attorney’s fees and costs no later than fourteen days before the objection deadline for class members. 11. All deadlines other than those related to the Settlement remain STAYED. DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on August 2, 2022. Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Page 3 of 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?