SPACK v. TRANS WORLD ENTERTAINMENT et al

Filing 229

ORDER granting 217 Motion to Certify Class; granting 226 Motion to Certify Class; granting 227 Motion for Attorney Fees. ORDERED, on this 14th day of April, 2021, upon consideration of the Plaintiffs' Motion for Final Approval, the Not ion for Attorneys' Fees, Reimbursement of Expenses and Service Awards, it is: ORDERED, except as otherwise specified herein, the Court for purposes of this Order adopts all defined terms as set forth in the Agreement; ORDERED, this Court has jur isdiction over the subject matter of this litigation and all matters relating thereto, and over all Parties; ORDERED, pursuant to Rule 23, the Court confirms as final its certification of the Class for settlement purposes based on its findings in the Preliminary Approval Order and in the absence of any objections from Class Members to such certification; ORDERED, pursuant to 29 U.S.C. Section 216(b), the Court approves the FLSA Settlement and certifies the collective class under the FLSA; ORDERE D, the Court confirms as final the appointment of Plaintiffs Carol Spack, Tabitha Schmidt, and Natasha Roper as representatives of the Class, both under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 and 29 U.S.C. Section 216(b); ORDERED, the Court likewise conf irms as final the appointment of Mashel Law, L.L.C. as Class Counsel for the Class pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 and for individuals who opted into the Litigation pursuant to 29 U.S.C. Section 216(b); ORDERED, the Court finds the req uirements of the Class Action Fairness, 28 U.S.C. Section 1715 (CAFA), have been satisfied. The Court finds the requirements of CAFA have been satisfied, and this Order granting final approval of the settlement is now appropriate; ORDERED, the Cour t finds that the notice distributed to class and collective members (the "Class/Collective Notice") pursuant to the Preliminary Approval Order constituted the best notice practicable under the circumstances, was accomplished in all material respects, and fully met the requirements of Rule 23, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and due process; ORDERED, pursuant to Rule 23(e), this Court hereby grants the Motion for Final Approval and finally approves the settlement as set forth therein. Th e Court finds that the settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate in all respects ad that it is binding on Class Members who did not timely opt out pursuant to the procedures set forth in the Preliminary Approval Order. The Court specifically finds that the settlement is rationally related to the strength of Plaintiffs' claims given the risk, expense, complexity, and duration of further litigation. ORDERED, the Court finds that the proposed settlement is procedurally fair because it was reached through vigorous, arm's length negotiations and after experienced counsel had evaluated the merits of Plaintiffs' claims through factual and legal investigation. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Visa U.S.A., Inc., 396 F.3d 96, 117 (2d Cir. 2005); ORDERED, the Court finds the settlement is also substantively fair. All the factors set forth in Grinnell, which provides the analytical framework for evaluating the substantive fairness of a class action settlement, weight in favor of final approval. City of Detroit v. Grinnell Corp., 495 F.2d 448 (2d Cir. 1974). Therefore, the Court finds that the settlement is adequate given: (1) the complexity, expense and likely duration of the litigation; (2) the stage of the proceedings and the amount of discovery completed; (3) the risks of establishing liability and damages; (4) the risks of maintaining the class action through the trial; (5) the lack of any objections; 96) the ability of the defendants to withstand a greater judgment; a nd (7) that the Total Settlement Amount is within the range of reasonableness in light of the best possible recovery and the attendant risks of litigation. Grinnell, 495 F.2d at 463; ORDERED, the Court finds that the class' reaction to the sett lement was positive, as no Class Member objected to the settlement; ORDERED, the Court finds that the proposed plan of allocation is rationally to the relative strengths and weaknesses of the respective claims asserted. The mechanisms and procedures set forth in the Agreement by which payments are to be calculated and made to Class Members who did not timely opt out are fair, reasonable and adequate, and payment shall be made according to those allocations and pursuant to the procedures as set forth in the Agreement; ORDERED, the Court hereby grants Plaintiffs' Motion for Attorneys' Fees and awards Class Counsel $133,200.00, which is approximately 33 1/3% of the Settlement Funds, which the Court finds to be fair and rea sonable based on: (1) the number of hours worked by Class Counsel during the Litigation; (2) the results achieved on behalf of the Class; (3) the contingent nature of Class Counsel's representation; (4) the complexity of the issues raised by th e Litigation; (5) a lodestar cross check; and (6) Class Counsel's recognized experience and expertise in the market. The Court finds Class Counsel's hourly rates to be reasonable; ORDERED, the Court also awards Class Counsel reimbursement of their litigation expenses in the amount of $32,537.07, which are expenses the Court finds were necessarily and reasonably incurred by Class Counsel in prosecuting the Litigation. The attorneys' fees and the amount in reimbursement of l itigation costs and expenses shall be paid from the Settlement Fund; ORDERED, the Court approves and finds the service awards for Plaintiffs Carol Spack, Tabitha Schmidt and Natasha Roper in the amount of $5,000.00 each in recognition of the ser vices they rendered on behalf of the class. The Court also approves the requested service awards in the amount of $250.00 to the 40 Discovery Opt-In Plaintiffs who participated in discovery. These amounts shall be paid from the Settlement Fund s, subject to the terms of the Parties' Settlement Agreement; ORDERED, the Court approves and finds reasonable the payment of the Settlement Administrator's fees in the amount of $24,000.00 which shall be paid out of the Settlement Fun d, according to the terms of the Parties' Settlement Agreement; ORDERED, the Court hereby fully and finally dismisses this matter and Litigation in its entirety and with prejudice. Neither party to this Litigation is or shall be considered a pr evailing party; ORDERED, the Parties entered into the Settlement Agreement solely for the purpose of compromising and settling disputed claims. Defendants in no way admit any violation of law or any liability whatsoever to Plaintiffs, the Class or the Collective, individually or collectively, all such liability being expressly denied by Defendants; ORDERED, the Court retains jurisdiction over this action for the purpose of enforcing the Settlement Agreement and overseeing the distribution of settlement funds. The Parties shall abide by all terms of the Settlement Agreement, which are incorporated herein, and this Order. Signed by Senior Judge Thomas J. McAvoy on 4/14/2021. (khr)