Lloyd v. Keesler Federal Credit Union

Filing 60

FINAL APPROVAL ORDER granting 55 Motion for Final Approval. See Order for details. Signed by District Judge Halil S. Ozerden on 8/2/22. (JCH)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI
SOUTHERN DIVISION
SHIRLEY LLOYD, on behalf of herself
and all others similarly situated

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

v.
KEESLER FEDERAL
CREDIT UNION

PLAINTIFF
Civil No. 1:19cv351-HSO-BWR

DEFENDANT

consolidated with
VICTORIA MILLER, on behalf of herself
and all others similarly situated
v.
KEESLER FEDERAL
CREDIT UNION

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

PLAINTIFF
Civil No. 1:21cv326-HSO-BWR

DEFENDANT

FINAL APPROVAL ORDER
WHEREAS, Plaintiffs Shirley Lloyd and Victoria Miller (the “Class
Representatives”) and Defendant Keesler Federal Credit Union (“Defendant”), by
their respective counsel, entered into the Class Action Settlement Agreement
(“Settlement Agreement”);
WHEREAS, the Class Representatives and Defendant applied pursuant to
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(3) for an order preliminarily
approving the proposed Settlement and preliminarily approving the form and plan of
notice and distribution as set forth in the Settlement Agreement;

1

WHEREAS, this Court previously certified for settlement and notice purposes
only the following class (the “Class”):
All members of Defendant who, while members of Defendant, have been
charged an APPSN Fee or a Futile ODT Fee during the Class Period.1
Excluded from the Class are Defendant’s current and former officers, directors,
affiliates, legal representatives, employees, successors, subsidiaries, and
assigns. Also excluded are any judges who have presided over this matter and
their immediate families and judicial staff.
WHEREAS, on February 9, 2022, the Court entered an order preliminarily
approving the Settlement Agreement, approving the forms of notice of the Settlement
Agreement to the members of the Settlement Class, directing that appropriate notice
of the Settlement Agreement be given to Class Members, and scheduling a hearing
on final approval (the “Preliminary Approval Order”);
WHEREAS, in accordance with the Settlement Agreement and the
Preliminary Approval Order: (1) the Settlement Administrator caused the Notice of
Class Action Settlement to be emailed and/or mailed by United States First Class
Mail to all known members of the Class; and (2) the affidavit of notice filed with this
Court by Class Counsel demonstrates compliance with the Preliminary Approval
Order with respect to the emailed and mailed notice and, further, that the best notice
practicable under the circumstances was, in fact, given;

1

APPSN Fee means an overdraft fee charged on a debit card transaction that was authorized
into a positive balance and settled into a negative balance. Futile ODT Fee means an
overdraft transfer fee that was charged on a transfer which did not prevent an overdraft fee
from being assessed. The Class Period is defined in the Settlement Agreement as June 28,
2016, to December 1, 2021.

2

WHEREAS, Class Counsel filed with the Court a listing of the names of the
members of the Settlement Class and the names of those persons who submitted valid
requests for exclusion from the Class, which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1;
WHEREAS, on August 2, 2022 at 9:30 a.m., this Court held a hearing on
whether the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the best
interests of the Class and whether to grant Class Counsel’s Motion for attorneys’ fees
and costs (the “Final Approval Hearing”); and
WHEREAS, based upon the foregoing, having heard the statements of Class
Counsel and Counsel for Defendant, and of such persons as chose to appear at the
Final Approval Hearing; having considered all of the files, records and proceedings in
the Lawsuit, the benefits to the Class under the Settlement and the risks, complexity,
expense, and probable duration of further litigation; and being fully advised in the
premises;
THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS:
1.

Terms capitalized herein and not otherwise defined shall have the

meanings ascribed to them in the Settlement Agreement.
2.

This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this lawsuit and

jurisdiction over the Class Representatives and Defendant in this case (the “Parties”).
3.

The Court hereby adopts and reaffirms the findings and conclusions set

forth in the Preliminary Approval Order.
4.

The Class Representatives and Class Counsel fairly and adequately

represent the interests of the Class in connection with the Settlement Agreement.

3

5.

The individuals listed in Exhibit 1 will not be bound by the Settlement

or the Releases contained therein.
6.

The Settlement Agreement is the product of good faith, arm’s-length

negotiations by the Class Representatives and Class Counsel, and Defendant and
Defendant’s Counsel, and the Class and Defendant were represented by capable and
experienced counsel.
7.

The form, content, and method of dissemination of the notice given to

members of the Class—individuals emailed or mailed notice—were adequate and
reasonable, constituted the best notice practicable under the circumstances, and
satisfied the requirements of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(c)(2) and Due
Process.
8.

The Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate and in the

best interests of the Class and is approved in all respects. The Court hereby directs
the Class Representatives, the Class, Class Counsel, Defendant, and Defendant’s
Counsel to effectuate the Settlement Agreement according to its terms.
9.

The Court affirms the finding that the Settlement Class meets the

relevant requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and (b)(3) for purposes
of the Settlement in that:

(1) the number of Settlement Class Members is so

numerous that joinder is impracticable; (2) there are questions of law and fact
common to the Settlement Class members; (3) the claims of the Class Representatives
are typical of the claims of the Settlement Class members; (4) the Class
Representatives are adequate representatives for the Settlement Class, and have

4

retained experienced counsel to represent them; (5) the questions of law and fact
common to the Settlement Class members predominate over any questions affecting
any individual Settlement Class member; and (6) a class action is superior to the
other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy.
10.

For purposes of the Settlement only, the Court finds and determines

that pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 23(a)(1), Plaintiffs Shirley
Lloyd and Victoria Miller will fairly and adequately represent the interests of the
Settlement Class in enforcing their rights in the Action, and therefore re-affirms their
appointment as the Class Representatives.
11.

For purposes of the Settlement only, and pursuant to Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 23(g)(1), the Court re-affirms the following as Class Counsel to act on
behalf of the Settlement Class and the Class Representatives with respect to the
Settlement:
Christopher Weldy, Esq.
WELDY LAW FIRM, PLCC
1438 North State Street
Jackson, MS 39202
Jeffrey D. Kaliel, Esq.
Sophia G. Gold, Esq.
KALIELGOLD PLLC
1100 15th Street NW 4th Floor
Washington, DC 20005
The Court finds that based on the record evidence submitted to it, Class
Counsel has done extensive work to identify and investigate the potential claims in
this Action; Class Counsel has ample experience in handling class actions and
complex actions such as this one; Class Counsel is knowledgeable of the applicable
5

law given their experience in other class actions raising the same claims as this one
as well as the specific law of Mississippi; Class Counsel has and will commit the
necessary resources in representing the class.
12.

The Settlement Agreement provides for certain benefits to Class

Members. The Court approves those benefits and approves the distribution plan for
the Settlement Fund set forth in the Settlement Agreement, and the parties are
authorized to implement that distribution after deductions for fees, expenses, and
service awards as approved by the Court.
13.

The Court shall have continuing jurisdiction over the Settlement Fund.

14.

Upon the occurrence of the Effective Date of the Settlement Agreement,

the Class Representatives and the Class Members release and forever discharge
Defendant and its insurers, and including but not limited to their members, current
and former officers, directors, employees, attorneys and agents (the “Released
Parties”) from all past and present known and unknown claims, demands, damages,
causes of action or suits seeking damages, or other legal or equitable relief arising
out of or in any way related to the claims asserted or which could have been asserted
relating to (1) Futile ODT Fees; and (2) APPSN Fees that were charged during the
Class Period. Plaintiffs expressly waive and relinquish all rights and benefits they
may have pursuant to Section 1542 of the California Civil Code and any similar law
of any state or territory of the United States or any foreign tribunal. The release shall
not extend to any claims by Class Members for bodily injury or under the
Servicemembers Civil Relief Act.

6

15.

Subject to Class Representatives’ compliance with closure of their

Accounts under the Settlement Agreement, Defendant releases all claims of any kind
or nature that have been or could have been asserted against the Class
Representatives, any Class Member, or Class Counsel relating to the filing or
prosecution of the Complaint.
16.

If, consistent with the plan of distribution set forth in the Settlement

Agreement, any residual funds exist after the first distribution, the residue will go to
Settlement Class Members by way of a secondary distribution, if economically
feasible. Following the second distribution, or if no second distribution is required to
be made, any remaining unclaimed settlement funds will be distributed to two cy pres
recipients, one nominated by Class Counsel and one nominated by Defendant, agreed
to by the Parties, their attorneys and approved by the Court.
17.

The Court finds that the attorneys’ fees requested by Class Counsel,

which represents one-third of the Settlement Fund, are fair and reasonable. Class
Counsel is therefore awarded attorneys’ fees in the amount of $1,000,000 and costs
in the amount of $18,528.13, such amounts to be paid from the Settlement Fund in
accordance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement.
18.

The Class Representatives are awarded Service Awards totaling

$12,500, such amount to be paid from the Settlement Fund in accordance with the
terms of the Settlement Agreement.
19.

The Court will award funds to pay the Settlement Administrator for its

services in the manner described in the Agreement.

7

20.

The above-captioned lawsuit is hereby dismissed without assessment of

costs or attorneys’ fees against any party except as provided in the Settlement
Agreement and Court order.
21.

This Order is a final judgment because it disposes of all claims against

all parties to this lawsuit. The Court retains jurisdiction over the Settlement
Agreement, the parties to the Settlement Agreement, and all matters relating to the
administration and enforcement of the Settlement Agreement.
22.

Accordingly, the Unopposed Motion for Final Approval is GRANTED.

THERE BEING NO JUST REASON FOR DELAY, LET JUDGMENT BE
ENTERED ACCORDINGLY.

s/ Halil Suleyman Ozerden

Dated: August 2, 2022

HALIL SULEYMAN OZERDEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

8

Exhibit 1: Exclusion List
• Linda Bradley
• Thao Nguyen
• Yen Nguyen
• Simon Tran

9