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.

Amanda Georgino, An Individual, On Behalf of Herself and All Others v. Sur La Table

May 9, 2013

AMANDA GEORGINO, AN INDIVIDUAL, ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, PLAINTIFF,
v.
SUR LA TABLE, INC., A WASHINGTON CORPORATION; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 50, INCLUSIVE, DEFENDANTS.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: Margaret M. Morrowunited States District Judge

AND CONSOLIDATED CASES CLASS ACTION ORDER AND JUDGMENT GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL TO CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT, ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS, AND CLASS REPRESENTATIVE ENHANCEMENT

The Court has (1) reviewed and considered the terms and conditions of the proposed Settlement as set forth in the Settlement Agreement ; (2) reviewed and considered the application of Class Counsel for an award of attorneys' fees, costs, expenses, and incentive awards; (3) held a Final Approval Hearing after being satisfied that notice to the Class has been provided in accordance with the Court's Order Granting Preliminary Approval to Proposed Class Settlement entered on December 11, 2012 (the "Preliminary Approval Order"); (4) taken into account the presentations and other proceedings at the Final Approval Hearing; and (5) considered the Settlement in the context of all prior proceedings had in this litigation. Accordingly, the Court enters the following FINDINGS and CONCLUSIONS:

A. The Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over this Action and all acts within this Action, and over all the parties to this Action, including all members of the Class.

B. The Class conditionally certified in the Preliminary Approval Order has been appropriately certified for settlement purposes. Class Counsel and the Class Representatives have fairly and adequately represented the Class for purposes of entering into and implementing the Settlement.

C. The notice to putative Class Members was comprised of individual mailed and emailed notice to all Known Class Members and steps taken to provide notice to unknown Class Members. The Court finds that this notice (i) constituted the best notice practicable under the circumstances, (ii) constituted notice that was reasonably calculated, under the circumstances, to apprise the putative Class Members of the pendency of the Action, and of their right to object and to appear at the Final Approval Hearing or to exclude themselves from the Settlement, (iii) was reasonable and constituted due, adequate, and sufficient notice to all persons entitled to be provided with notice, and (iv) fully complied with due process principles and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23.

D. The Court has held a Final Approval Hearing to consider the fairness, reasonableness, and adequacy of the Settlement and has been advised that there have been no objections to the Settlement.

E. The Settlement is the product of good faith, arm's-length negotiations between the Class Representatives and Class Counsel, on the one hand, and Defendant and its counsel, on the other hand.

F. The Settlement, as provided for in the Settlement Agreement, is in all respects fair, reasonable, adequate, and proper, and in the best interest of the Class. In reaching this conclusion, the Court considered a number of factors, including: [1] the strength of Plaintiffs' case; [2] the risk, expense, complexity, and likely duration of further litigation; [3] the risk of maintaining class action status throughout the trial; [4] the amount offered in settlement; [5] the extent of discovery completed, and the stage of the proceedings; [6] the experience and views of counsel; [7] the presence of a governmental participant; and [8] the reaction of the class members to the proposed settlement. See Torrisi v. Tucson Elec. Power Co., 8 F.3d 1370, 1375 (9th Cir. 1993).

G. A list of those putative Class Members who have timely elected to opt out of the Settlement and the Class, and who are therefore not bound by the Settlement, the provisions of the Settlement Agreement, this Order and the final Judgment to be entered by the Clerk of the Court hereon, has been submitted to the Court in the Declaration of Michael E. Hamer, filed in advance of the Final Approval Hearing. All Class Members (as permanently certified below) shall be subject to all of the provisions of the Settlement, the Settlement Agreement, this Order, and final Judgment to be entered by the Clerk of the Court.

On the basis of the foregoing findings and conclusions, as well as the submissions and proceedings referred to above, NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED:

1. The Settlement and the Settlement Agreement are hereby approved as fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the best interests of the Class, and the requirements of due process and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 have been satisfied. The parties are ordered and directed to comply with the terms and provisions of the Settlement Agreement.

2. The Court having found that each of the elements of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(3) are satisfied, for purposes of settlement only, the Class is permanently certified pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, on behalf of the following persons:

All individuals who used a credit card issued for consumer credit purposes to purchase goods or services from one of Defendant's retail stores (either in person or over the phone) in the State of California during the period of time between February 16, 2010 through February 11, 2011, and whose personal identification information was requested and recorded by Defendant for any reason other than a special order, installation, or delivery.

The Class Members identified in the exhibits attached to the Declaration of Michael E. Hamer submitted to the Court as having timely and properly elected to opt out from the Settlement and the Class are hereby excluded from the Class and shall not be entitled to any of the benefits afforded to the Class Members under the Settlement Agreement. The Court readopts and incorporates herein by reference its preliminary conclusions as to the satisfaction of Rules 23(a) and (b)(3) set forth in the Preliminary Approval Order and notes again that because this certification of the Class is in connection with the Settlement ...


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.