Frank v. Dana Corporation et al
FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE See order for full details. Judge James G. Carr on 11/30/16. (C,D)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION (TOLEDO)
PLUMBERS & PIPEFITTERS NATIONAL )
PENSION FUND; SEIU PENSION PLANS )
MASTER TRUST; and WEST VIRGINIA
LABORERS PENSION TRUST FUND, On )
Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly )
MICHAEL J. BURNS and ROBERT C.
Civil Action No. 3:05-cv-07393-JGC
Senior Judge James G. Carr
FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE
LANDSKRONER • GRIECO • MERRIMAN, LLC
JACK LANDSKRONER (0059227)
1360 West 9th Street, Suite 200
Cleveland, OH 44113
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN
& DOWD LLP
MICHAEL J. DOWD
DEBRA J. WYMAN
LAURIE L. LARGENT
MAUREEN E. MUELLER
655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
San Diego, CA 92101
This matter came before the Court for hearing pursuant to the Order Preliminarily Approving
Settlement and Providing for Notice (“Preliminary Approval Order”) dated July 19, 2016, on the
application of the Settling Parties for approval of the Settlement set forth in the Stipulation of
Settlement dated July 13, 2016 (the “Stipulation”). Due and adequate notice having been given to
the Class as required in said Order, and the Court having considered all papers filed and proceedings
had herein and otherwise being fully informed in the premises and good cause appearing therefore,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that:
This Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal with Prejudice (“Order and Final
Judgment” or “Judgment”) incorporates by reference the definitions in the Stipulation, and all terms
used herein shall have the same meanings as set forth in the Stipulation, unless otherwise set forth
This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Litigation and over all
Settling Parties to the Litigation, including all members of the Class.
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, this Court hereby approves the
Settlement set forth in the Stipulation and finds that said Settlement is, in all respects, fair,
reasonable, and adequate to the Class.
Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court finds that the
Settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate as to each of the Settling Parties, and that the Settlement
set forth in the Stipulation is hereby finally approved in all respects, and the Settling Parties are
hereby directed to perform its terms.
Accordingly, the Court authorizes and directs implementation of the terms and
provisions of the Stipulation, as well as the terms and provisions hereof. The Court hereby dismisses
with prejudice the Litigation and all claims contained therein and all of the Released Claims as
against the Released Persons, except as and to the extent provided in the Stipulation and herein.
Upon the Effective Date hereof, and as provided in the Stipulation, Class
Representatives and each and all of the Class Members, shall be deemed to have, and by operation of
this Judgment shall have, fully, finally, and forever remised, released, relinquished, and discharged
all Released Claims (including, without limitation, Unknown Claims) against the Released Persons,
regardless of whether such Class Member executes and delivers the Proof of Claim and Release
form, except for claims relating to the enforcement of the Settlement.
Upon the Effective Date hereof, and as provided in the Stipulation, each of the
Released Persons shall be deemed to have, and by operation of this Judgment shall have, fully,
finally, and forever released, relinquished, and discharged Class Representatives, each and all of the
Class Members, and Plaintiffs’ Counsel from Defendants’ Released Claims, and shall forever be
enjoined from prosecuting such claims, except for claims relating to the enforcement of the
The Notice of Pendency and Proposed Settlement of Class Action given to the Class
in accordance with the Preliminary Approval Order entered on July 19, 2016, was the best notice
practicable under the circumstances, including the individual notice to all members of the Class who
could be identified through reasonable effort. Said notice provided the best notice practicable under
the circumstances of those proceedings and of the matters set forth therein, including the proposed
Settlement set forth in the Stipulation, to all Persons entitled to such notice, and said notice fully
satisfied the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, the requirements of due process,
and the requirements of the PSLRA, and all other applicable law and rules.
Separate orders shall be entered regarding the proposed Plan of Allocation and Class
Counsel’s motion for attorneys’ fees and expenses as allowed by the Court. Any plan of allocation
submitted by Class Counsel or any order entered regarding any attorneys’ fee and expense
application shall in no way disturb or affect this Judgment and shall be considered separate from this
Neither the Stipulation nor any of its terms or provisions, nor any of the negotiations,
discussions, proceedings connected with it, nor any act performed or document executed pursuant to
or in furtherance of the Stipulation or the Settlement: (a) is or may be deemed to be or may be used
as an admission of, or evidence of, the validity of any of the allegations in the Litigation or of the
validity of any Released Claim, or of any wrongdoing or liability of the Released Persons; or (b) is
or may be deemed to be or may be used as an admission of, or evidence of, any fault or omission of
any of the Released Persons in any civil, criminal, or administrative proceeding in any court,
arbitration proceeding, administrative agency, or forum or tribunal in which the Released Persons are
or become parties; or (c) is or may be deemed to be or may be used as an admission or evidence that
any claims asserted by Class Representatives were not valid or that the amount recoverable was not
greater than the Settlement Amount, in any civil, criminal, or administrative proceeding in any court,
administrative agency, or other tribunal. The Released Persons, Class Representatives, Class
Members, and their respective counsel may file the Stipulation and/or this Judgment in any action
that may be brought against them in order to support a defense or counterclaim based on principles
of res judicata, collateral estoppel, release, good faith settlement, judgment bar or reduction or any
other theory of claim preclusion or issue preclusion or similar defense or counterclaim. The Settling
Parties may file the Stipulation and/or this Judgment in any proceedings that may be necessary to
consummate or enforce the Stipulation, the Settlement, or the Judgment.
Without affecting the finality of this Judgment in any way, this Court hereby retains
continuing exclusive jurisdiction over: (a) implementation of this Settlement and any award or
distribution of the Settlement Fund, including interest earned thereon; (b) disposition of the
Settlement Fund; (c) hearing and determining applications for attorneys’ fees and expenses and
interest in the Litigation; and (d) all Settling Parties hereto for the purpose of construing, enforcing,
and administering the Stipulation.
The Court finds that during the course of the Litigation, the Settling Parties and their
respective counsel at all times complied with the requirements of Rule 11(b) of the Federal Rules of
In the event that the Settlement does not become effective in accordance with the
terms of the Stipulation, or the Effective Date does not occur, or in the event that the Settlement
Fund, or any portion thereof, is returned to the Defendants, then this Judgment shall be rendered null
and void to the extent provided by and in accordance with the Stipulation and shall be vacated and,
in such event, all orders entered and releases delivered in connection herewith shall be null and void
to the extent provided by and in accordance with the Stipulation.
Without further order of the Court, the Settling Parties may agree to reasonable
extensions of time to carry out any of the provisions of the Stipulation.
The Court has considered the objection filed by Jeff M. Brown, and finds that he has
not established his standing as a Class Member to bring the objection. Nevertheless, the Court has
considered the merits of the objection and finds that even if Mr. Brown had standing, his objection is
without merit. The objection is therefore overruled in its entirety.
The Court directs immediate entry of this Judgment by the Clerk of the Court.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
THE HONORABLE JAMES G. CARR
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?