Bailey v. CPA Global Support Services, LLC

Filing 36

ORDER. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: The Parties' Joint Motion is GRANTED; 30 . (Written Opinion). Signed by Chief Judge Michael J. Davis on 6/24/15. (GRR)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA

RACHELLE BAILEY, on behalf of herself
and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs,
v.

ORDER
Civil File No. 14-3091 (MJD/JJK)

CPA GLOBAL SUPPORT SERVICES, LLC,
Defendant.

Alexander M. Baggio and Michele R. Fisher, Nichols Kaster, PLLP, Counsel for
Plaintiff.
Ankoor Bagchi and Rachel B. Cowen, DLA Piper LLP, Counsel for Defendant.

This matter is before the Court on the Parties’ Joint Motion for Preliminary
Settlement Approval (“Joint Motion”).
After reviewing all of the files and records herein, IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED:
Preliminary Approval of Settlement Agreement
1.

The Parties’ Joint Motion is GRANTED;

1

2.

The Court has conducted a preliminary fairness review of the
Settlement Agreement [Docket No. 30-4] with respect to Plaintiff’s
claim for relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. § 201 et
seq. The Court finds that the terms of the Settlement Agreement
provide a fair, reasonable, and adequate resolution to a bona fide
dispute between the parties. Considering the strength of the
Plaintiffs’ case as weighed against the defenses asserted by the
Defendant, the proposed Settlement Agreement appears to provide
adequate relief. There has been no indication that the Defendant is
unable to pay, or that the Defendant will experience financial
hardship because of the Settlement Agreement. Moreover, further
litigation of this matter would prove costly to the parties, especially
considering the relatively complex issue of damages in this case.
Finally, the parties indicate that there is no opposition to the
settlement at this juncture.

3.

The Court finds that the Settlement Agreement was arrived at by
arm’s-length negotiations by experienced counsel, and falls within
the range of possible approval.

2

Class Certification
4.

Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the
Court finds that the prerequisites for a class action have been met.
The Court certifies the Proposed Rule 23 Class and FLSA Collective
for settlement purposes only (the “Settlement Class”):
All current and former employees of CPA Global that
worked as non-managerial paralegals or docketing
specialists, in any location, between August 4, 2011 and
September 29, 2014.

5.

The Court finds that certification of the Settlement Class is
warranted because:
a. The Settlement Class, which has approximately 85 members, and
is geographically dispersed across several of the United States, is
sufficiently numerous, and joinder is sufficiently impracticable,
to satisfy Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(1)’s numerosity requirement;
b. There are sufficient legal and factual issues common to the
Settlement Class to meet Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(2)’s commonality
requirement, including, but not limited to:
i. Whether Defendant improperly classified Plaintiffs
as exempt from overtime laws;
ii. Whether Defendant owes Plaintiffs overtime
compensation as a result of misclassification;

3

iii. How to calculate the overtime premium (e.g.
whether the fluctuating workweek applies);
iv. Whether Defendant’s conduct was willful or in good
faith;
v. Whether Defendant maintained accurate
timekeeping records; and
vi. The proper measure of damages.
c. Plaintiff Rachelle Bailey’s claims arise out of the same alleged
misconduct and therefore satisfy the Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a)(3)’s
typicality requirement;
d. Common issues, including those listed above, predominate over
any individual issues affecting the members of the Settlement
Class;
e. Settlement of this action on a class basis is superior to other
means of adjudicating this matter.
Class Notices
6.

The proposed Notices [Docket Nos. 30-5, 30-6 and 30-7] are
approved for distribution. Class Counsel shall mail the Notices
within five (5) calendar days of the date of this Order. The Parties
are permitted to finalize the Notices prior to distribution to include
applicable deadlines, adjust page numbers, insert information

4

regarding the final hearing date, and, on the concluding page, insert
today’s date and the undersigned’s printed name;
Exclusion Rights and Procedure
7.

Members of the Settlement Class who wish to object or opt-out must
do so by delivering within 30 calendar days of the mailing of the
Notice of Preliminary Settlement Approval a written objection or
request to opt-out to Class Counsel (who shall serve all objections as
received on CPA Global’s counsel and file them with the Court);
Appointment of Class Representative and Counsel

8.

Plaintiff Rachelle Bailey is hereby appointed as Class
Representative;

9.

Plaintiffs’ Counsel Michele R. Fisher and Alexander M. Baggio are
hereby appointed as Class Counsel;
Final Approval Hearing

10.

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, a final settlement
approval hearing is scheduled for August 28, 2015, at 9:30 a.m. in
Courtroom 13E, 300 South Fourth Street, Minneapolis, MN 55415.
The purpose of the hearing will be:

5

a. to determine whether the proposed Settlement is fair, reasonable,
and adequate;
b. to consider any objections to the Settlement by members of the
Settlement Class; and
c. to consider an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees and expenses,
an incentive award to the Class Representative, and any
objections thereto.

Dated: June 24, 2015

s/ Michael J. Davis
The Honorable Michael J. Davis
Chief Judge
United States District Court

6