Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Atlas v. Accredited Home Lenders Holding Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA


June 4, 2010

MICHAEL ATLAS AND GAIL ATLAS, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFFS,
v.
ACCREDITED HOME LENDERS HOLDING CO.; JAMES KONRATH; JOSEPH J. LYDON; STUART D. MARVIN; JOHN S. BUCHANAN; DAVID E. HERTZEL; AND JEFFREY W. CRAWFORD, DEFENDANTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Marilyn L. Huff, District Judge United States District Court

ORDER APPROVING DISTRIBUTION OF NET SETTLEMENT FUND

On June 2, 2010, Lead Plaintiff Arkansas Teacher Retirement System ("Lead Plaintiff") filed a motion for approval of a distribution plan for the Net Settlement Fund. (Doc. No. 226.) Considering all materials and argument submitted in support of the motion, including the Memorandum in Support of Unopposed Motion for Approval of Distribution of Settlement and the Declaration of Jennifer M. Keough Re: Distribution of Net Settlement Fund (the "Keough Declaration") submitted therewith the Court orders the following:

A. The administrative recommendations to accept claims, including the claims filed after the November 17, 2009 deadline ("Late Claims") but before May 4, 2010, and to reject wholly ineligible or otherwise deficient claims, as recommended by the Claims Administrator, The Garden City Group ("Garden City"), as stated in the Keough Declaration, are adopted, and said claims are hereby accepted and eligible for payment from the Net Settlement Fund;

B. Distribution of the Net Settlement Fund (after deduction for the payments for accrued and anticipated expenses as authorized by the Stipulation of Settlement or the Court) to the Authorized Claimants pursuant to the Court-approved Plan of Allocation is directed;

C. The distribution drafts may state that the distribution check must be cashed within 120 days;

D. The recommended plan for Settlement Funds remaining after the initial distribution is adopted, pursuant to paragraph 5.6 of the Stipulation, as follows:

If there is any balance remaining in the Net Settlement Fund after six (6) months from the date of distribution of the Net Settlement Fund (whether by reason of tax refunds, uncashed checks or otherwise), Lead Counsel shall, if feasible, reallocate such balance among Authorized Claimants who deposited the checks sent in the initial distribution in an equitable and economic fashion. At such time as the Claims Administrator and Lead Counsel determine that further redistribution is not cost-effective, donation of the balance of the Net Settlement Fund, after payment of any unpaid costs or fees associated in connection with administering the Net Settlement Fund, may be made to non-sectarian, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) organization(s) designated by Lead Counsel and approved by the Court;

E. The Court approves of Lead Plaintiff's selection of the Legal Aid Society of San Diego, Inc. for any cy pres award that may become appropriate;

F. Class Members are barred from making any further claim against the Net Settlement Fund, and all persons involved in the claims administration process are released and discharged from any and all claims arising out of such involvement;

G. Destruction of paper copies of the Claim Forms and electronic copies of Claims records one year and three years after final distribution, respectively, is authorized;

H. In accordance with the Stipulation of Settlement, payment to the Claims Administrator, Garden City, from the Settlement Fund of the balance owed of $308,803.93 for the fees and expenses incurred and estimated to be incurred through the end of the project, is authorized;

I. Payment to Lead Plaintiff's damages expert, Forensic Economics, Inc., from the Settlement Fund of the balance owed of $4,950.00 for the additional services rendered in connection with the Court-approved Plan of Allocation, is authorized; and

J. This Court retains jurisdiction to consider any further applications concerning the administration of the Settlement, and such other and further relief as this Court deems appropriate.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

20100604

© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.



Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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