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.

Helde v. Knight Transportation, Inc.

United States District Court, W.D. Washington

May 24, 2017

KEVIN HELDE, JON BODILY, and MAX TENA, on their own behalf and on the behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v.
KNIGHT TRANSPORTATION, INC., an Arizona corporation, Defendant.

          TERRELL MARSHALL LAW GROUP PLLC Toby J. Marshall, Hardeep S. Rekhi REKHI & WOLK, P.S. Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Class Members

          ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

          THE HONORABLE ROBERT S. LASNIK UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         WHEREAS, the Parties have entered into a Class Action Settlement Agreement and Release (the “Settlement Agreement”), [1] which sets forth the terms and conditions of the settlement and release of claims against Defendant Knight Transportation, Inc., the Court having reviewed and considered the Settlement Agreement and all of the filings, records, and other submissions; the Court finds upon a preliminary examination that the Agreement appears fair, reasonable, and adequate, and that a hearing should and will be held after notice to the Settlement Class in order to confirm that the Settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate, and to determine whether the Settlement Agreement should be finally approved pursuant to the terms and conditions set forth in the Settlement Agreement (“Final Approval Hearing”).

         THEREFORE, THE COURT FINDS AND CONCLUDES AS FOLLOWS:

1. Unless otherwise provided herein, all capitalized terms in this Order shall have the same meaning as set forth in the Settlement Agreement attached as Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of Toby J. Marshall in Support of Preliminary Approval.
2. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this Action and personal jurisdiction over the Parties and the Settlement Class.
3. The Court finds that (a) the Settlement Agreement resulted from extensive arm's-length negotiations, with participation of an experienced mediator, and (b) the Settlement Agreement is sufficient to warrant notice thereof to members of the Settlement Class and the Final Approval Hearing described below.
4. The Settlement Class includes all current and former Washington-based drivers whom Defendant identified as Class Members in this action, all of whom are listed in Exhibit A of the Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Class will not include any persons who validly request exclusion from the Class.
5. The Court has previously appointed Kevin Helde, Jon Bodily, and Max Tena as Class Representatives and finds that for settlement purposes, the Class Representatives have and (in the case of Mr. Helde and Mr. Bodily) will continue to fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Settlement Class.
6. The Court has previously appointed Rekhi & Wolk, P.S. and the Terrell Marshall Law Group PLLC as Class Counsel and finds that for settlement purposes, Class Counsel have and will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the Settlement Class.
7. The Court preliminarily finds that the Settlement Agreement is fundamentally fair, adequate, and reasonable 8. The Court appoints CPT Group as the Settlement Administrator, who shall fulfill the functions, duties, and responsibilities of the Settlement Administrator as set forth in the Settlement Agreement and this Order.
9. The Court approves the proposed forms of notice and notice plan for giving direct notice to the Settlement Class by U.S. Mail as set forth in Section II.H of the Settlement Agreement and its attached exhibits (“Notice Plan”). The Notice Plan, in form, method, and content, fully complies with the requirements of Rule 23 and due process, constitutes the best notice practicable under the circumstances, and is due and sufficient notice to all persons entitled thereto. The Court finds that the Notice Plan is reasonably calculated under all circumstances to reasonably apprise the persons in the Settlement Class of the pendency of this Action, the terms of the Settlement Agreement, and the right to object to the Settlement and to exclude themselves from the Settlement Class.
10. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, the Settlement Administrator shall provide individual notice via U.S. Mail to the most recent mailing address as reflected in Defendant's records no later than ten (10) days after entry of this Order.
11. Defendant shall bear all notice and settlement administration fees and costs in accordance with the ...

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.