Allerton v. Sprint Nextel Corporation
Filing
105
ORDER Granting 98 Motion for Order Granting Final Approval to Class Action Settlement. Signed by Judge Roger L. Hunt on 6/29/11. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - EDS)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
MARK R. THIERMAN (STATE BAR NO. 8285)
THIERMAN LAW FIRM
7287 Lakeside Drive
Reno, NV 89511
Telephone: 775-284-1500
LEON GREENBERG (STATE BAR NO. 8094)
LEON GREENBERG PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
633 South 4th Street, Suite 4
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Telephone: 702-383-6085
Facsimile:
702-385-1827
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
ELISE BLOOM, ESQ.
STEVEN HURD, ESQ.
PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
11 Times Square
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: 212-969-3000
Facsimile: 212-969-2900
KIRBY SMITH, ESQ.
LIONEL SAWYER & COLLINS
1700 Bank of America Plaza
300 South Fourth Street
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Telephone: (702) 383-8888
Facsimile: (702) 383-8845
Attorneys for Defendant
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA
JODI ALLERTON, Individually and on behalf of ) Case No. 2:09-CV-01325 (RLH/GWF)
)
others similarly situated,
)
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING
)
FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS
Plaintiffs,
)
ACTION SETTLEMENT
)
against
)
SPRINT NEXTEL CORPORATION and JOHN )
DOES I through XXX, actual names and number )
)
unknown,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
27
28
-16804/66816-050 current/22028699v3
1
2
On June 23, 2011, the Court heard the Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for an Order
3
Granting Final Approval to Proposed Class Action Settlement and accompanying declarations,
4
such settlement being pursuant to the terms set forth in the parties’ Joint Stipulation of Settlement
5
and Release (“Stipulation”). The Court finds and orders as follows:
6
1. For the purposes of this Order, the Court adopts all of the language and terms
7
set forth in the Stipulation, which was previously filed with this Court on February 14, 2011
8
9
10
11
(Docket No 91, Ex. “A”).
2. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this litigation and over all
parties and Class Members in this litigation.
12
3. The Court finds that the distribution of the Notice of Class Action Settlement,
13
which was carried out pursuant to the Stipulation, constituted the best notice practicable under the
14
circumstances and fully met the requirements of due process.
15
4. The Court finds that none of the 1363 Class Members have objected to the
16
17
Settlement. Only seven Class Members, who are Corine Assane; Olivia Baldwin; Robert Chertok;
18
Shineka Grubbs; Karen Lynch; Manuel Rivera and Tanya C. Thomas, have properly requested
19
exclusion from the settlement and are not subject to any of the provisions of the settlement. The
20
Court is advised by the Settlement Administrator that 26 Class Members have filed both timely
21
requests for exclusion and timely settlement claims. Of those 26 Class Members as of June 23,
22
2011, 9 have confirmed their intention to make settlement claims and their exclusion requests
23
24
shall be deemed void, their settlement claims honored and they shall be deemed to have given the
25
same full release of claims as all other claiming Class Members. The remaining 17 Class
26
Members who have filed both requests for exclusion and settlement claims shall have until
27
August 15, 2011 to advise the Settlement Administrator if they are withdrawing their settlement
28
claim and seeking to be excluded from the settlement. In the event they fail to so advise the
-26804/66816-050 current/22028699v3
1
Settlement Administrator, their requests for exclusion shall be deemed void, their settlement
2
claims honored and they shall be deemed to have given the same full release of claims as all other
3
claiming Class Members.
4
5
5. The Court finds that 340Class Members submitted timely settlement claims of
6
which 328 are valid and complete and 12 have deficiencies. . The 12 Class Members who have
7
filed the deficient, but timely, settlement claims shall have until August 15, 2011 to cure such
8
deficiencies with the Settlement Administrator. If they fail to do so, the Settlement Administrator
9
shall not honor their claims. The total of 340 Class Members who have been found to have
10
submitted timely claims represent approximately 25% of the Class Members and under the terms
11
of the Stipulation are collectively entitled to share a payment totaling $207,445.50.
12
13
6. The Court finds that the Stipulation was the product of protracted, arm’s length
14
negotiations between experienced counsel. After considering Defendant’s potential exposure, the
15
likelihood of success on the class claims, the risk, expense, complexity and delay associated with
16
further litigation, the risk of maintaining class certification through trial, the experience and views
17
of Plaintiffs’ Counsel, and the reaction of the Class to the Settlement, as well as other relevant
18
factors, the Court finds that the settlement, as set forth in the Stipulation, is fair, reasonable, and
19
in the best interests of the Class.
20
21
7. As counsel for the Class, Mark Thierman of the Thierman Law Firm, Leon
22
Greenberg of Leon Greenberg Professional Corporation, and Christian Gabroy of the Gabroy Law
23
Office shall be paid a fees payment of $225,000 and a costs payment of $14,432.75 from the
24
Settlement Fund for their services on behalf of the Plaintiffs and the Class.
25
26
8.
The Court approves the payment of enhancement awards of $10,000 each to
named and representative plaintiffs Jodi Allerton and John Henderson from the Settlement Fund
27
28
to compensate them for their efforts and work on behalf of the class, the Court finding such
-36804/66816-050 current/22028699v3
1
payments are fair, just and reasonable under the circumstances.
2
3
9. As the Settlement Administrator, Kurtzman Carson Consultants LLC. shall be
paid from the Settlement Fund for their services rendered in administering the Settlement, in
4
5
accordance with the Stipulation and as provided in this paragraph. Pursuant to the declaration of
6
Jeff Gyomber submitted to this Court Kurtzman Carson Consultants LLC’s costs for
7
administration of the settlement of this matter is $25,109. Payment of costs to Kurtzman Carson
8
Consultants LLC in that amount from the Settlement Fund is approved.
9
10
10.
The Court hereby grants final approval of the class action settlement, and the
parties are ordered to carry out the settlement as provided in the Stipulation, except as otherwise
11
modified by this Order. Thus, except as stated in this Order, all other terms of the settlement will
12
13
remain as stated in the Stipulation and accompanying documents and the Orders of this Court.
11.
14
This action is hereby dismissed with prejudice and all Class Members are
15
barred from asserting any of the released claims, as defined in the paragraph 19 of the Stipulation,
16
in any other proceeding and are permanently enjoined from initiating or otherwise participating in
17
the prosecution of any of the released claims, except that those Class Members who have duly
18
excluded themselves from the Class who are identified in paragraph 4 of this Order are not so
19
bound.
It is further provided that this Order does not impair or limit the rights under the Fair
20
21
Labor Standards Act of Class Members who have failed to previously file a consent to join form
22
under the FLSA with the Court or submit a valid settlement Claim Form to the Settlement
23
Administrator. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter a Final Judgment of dismissal and the
24
Complaint is hereby dismissed with prejudice.
25
26
///
///
27
28
///
-46804/66816-050 current/22028699v3
1
2
3
12.
The Court will retain jurisdiction for purposes of enforcing this settlement,
addressing settlement administration matters, and addressing such post-judgment matters as may
be appropriate under court rules or applicable law.
4
5
6
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 29, 2011.
July _____, 2011
7
HONORABLE ROGER L. HUNT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-56804/66816-050 current/22028699v3
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?