Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lopez v. Dandee Transportation

December 3, 2009

FRANK LOPEZ, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
v.
DANDEE TRANSPORTATION, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.
JOSE CAMARENA, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS,
v.
DANDEE TRANSPORTATION, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Lawrence J. O'Neill United States District Judge

ORDER AND JUDGMENT ON MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

Pursuant to the Order On Preliminary Approval Of Class Action Settlement filed herein on August 18, 2009 (Doc. 61), a Final Approval Hearing was held at 8:15 a.m. on December 3, 2009 in Courtroom 4 of this Court. Plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of all others similarly-situated (collectively "plaintiffs"), appeared at the hearing by telephone through class counsel, Jerry Budin and by Gregg Farley. Defendant DanDee Transportation ("DanDee") appeared at the hearing by counsel David Dixon of Dowling, Aaron & Keeler, Inc. The case was called at the hearing and the Court inquired whether anyone else in the courtroom was present to participate in the hearing. There was no response to this inquiry. The Court then inquired of counsel whether they expected anyone to appear at the hearing. Both counsel responded in the negative.

Having considered Plaintiffs' Memorandum Of Points And Authorities and Class Counsel's Declarations In Support Of Final Approval Of Class Action Settlement and the Declarations and papers previously filed herein, the Court makes the following Findings:

1. No class member or interested individual appeared personally at the time and place for the Final Approval Hearing (December 3, 2009, 8:15 a.m., Courtroom 4) which was contained in the Notice provided to all potential class members.

2. The Court finds that notice to the class was the best practicable under the circumstances and was satisfied and timely mailed as previously ordered by the Court.

3. The Court finds that the consideration for the proposed settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable.

4. The Court finds that there were no objections and one (1) exclusion from the proposed settlement.

5. The Court finds that the settlement was not collusive, and that the parties have engaged in sufficient discovery to understand the strengths and weaknesses of their own and their opponent's cases.

6. The Court finds that the lawyers representing the parties were competent and experienced counsel, and that no party has been subjected to any undue influence in reaching the settlement.

7. The Court finds that the attorney's fees requested by Class Counsel, Jerry Budin, Houman Fakhimi, and Gregg A. Farley in the total sum of $42,500.00 and actual costs in the total sum of $5,715.39 are fair and reasonable.

8. The Court finds that the formula for disbursement of the settlement proceeds to the Class and the procedure for administration of that disbursement as set forth in the Stipulation Regarding Settlement Of Class Action are fair, adequate and reasonable.

9. The Court finds that the Settlement Class members are similarly-situated and meet the requirements for certification of a class action under F.R.C.P. 23 and as a collective action under 29 U.S.C. §216(b).

10. The Court finds that a total payment of $15,000.00 to Class Representatives, Frank Lopez, David Palmer, Jose Camarena, Douglas Holmby and Rudy Cordova, for their efforts and services ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.