Gonzalez v. TZ Insurance Solutions LLC

Filing 49

ORDER: The Court approves the parties' Jointly Proposed Notice to the Class 48 and directs that the Notice be disseminated to the Class within ten days of the date of this Order. See Order for details. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 4/8/2014. (KAK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
BARRY GONZALEZ, on behalf of
himself and others similarly
situated,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 8:13-cv-2098-T-33EAJ

TZ INSURANCE SOLUTIONS, LLC,
Defendant.
______________________________/
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court pursuant to the
parties’ Joint Notice of Filing a Jointly Proposed Notice to
the Class (Doc. # 48), filed on April 7, 2014.

Upon due

consideration, the Court approves the proposed Class Notice
and directs that the Class Notice be disseminated within ten
days of the date of this Order.
Discussion
On March 26, 2014, the Court granted Plaintiff Barry
Gonzalez’s Motion for Conditional Certification and Order
Permitting
Plaintiffs.

Court-Supervised
(Doc.

#

45).

Notice
In

to

that

Potential
Order,

the

Opt-In
Court

conditionally certified a class of Tampa and Fort Myers,
Florida TZ Insurance Solutions Sales Agents and directed the
parties to file a Jointly Proposed Notice to the Class by

April 7, 2014. (Id. at 17).

The parties timely filed the

present jointly proposed Class Notice on April 7, 2014, and
they submit that the Notice can be disseminated to the Class
within ten days of the Court’s approval.
Approval of Class Notice
Court-authorized notice in a class action context helps
to prevent “misleading communications” and ensures that the
notice is “timely, accurate, and informative.”
Roche,

Inc.

v.

Sperling,

493

U.S.

165,

Hoffmann-La
171

(1989).

Furthermore, “in exercising the discretionary authority to
oversee the notice-giving process, courts must be scrupulous
to respect judicial neutrality.

To that end, trial courts

must take care to avoid even the appearance of judicial
endorsement of the merits of the action.” Id. at 174.
The Court determines that it is appropriate to adopt the
parties’ proposed Class Notice because it is consistent with
these aims.

The proposed Class Notice does not appear to be

weighted in favor of one side or the other and contains
language explaining the neutral role of the Court.

For

instance, the Class Notice explains that: “The Court has made
no finding as to the merits of the case at this time” and
“the Court has not yet made any rulings on whether TZ has

2

done anything wrong and has not decided whether this case
will proceed to trial.” (Doc. # 48-1 at 1-2).
The Court also determines that the proposed Class Notice
provides adequate information concerning the nature of the
action and the consequences of opting into the litigation or
declining

to

do

so.

See,

e.g.,

White

v.

Subcontracting

Concepts, Inc., No. 8:08-cv-620-T-30TGW, 2008 U.S. Dist.
LEXIS 96252, at *6 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 14, 2008)(specifying that
class

notice

must

warn

potential

class

members

of

“the

consequences of opting-in.”). The proposed Class Notice also
contains contact information for both counsel for Plaintiff
and counsel for Defendant.
Upon

careful

consideration,

the

Court

approves

and

adopts the parties’ proposed Class Notice and directs that
the Notice be disseminated, as specified in the Court’s
Conditional Certification Order, within ten days of the date
of this Order.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
The Court approves the parties’ Jointly Proposed Notice
to the Class (Doc. # 48) and directs that the Notice be
disseminated to the Class within ten days of the date of this
Order.

3

DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida, this
8th day of April, 2014.

Copies: All Counsel of Record

4