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.

Rozeboom v. Dietz & Watson, Inc.

United States District Court, W.D. Washington

May 17, 2019

SHARON ROZEBOOM, ANTHONY LAVALLEY, BROOKE ALCANTAR, MARY BILSKI, MATTHEW BRESLIN, MICHAEL BRODSKY, KATHY BUCKLEY, GLENN COHEN, TERESA DOAN, JOAN DURANTE, CHRISTIAN GAVILANES, MICHAEL LAGOY, LAURA LAKOWSKI, THOMAS LOBELLO, KAYODE LOTT, THOMAS MAIER, JULIUS MALEK, TINA NESBITT, NELSON ORTEGA, MARK ROHAN, RODNEY ROSS, TRENT RUSSELL, SABINA SCHOEN, STEPHEN SHRADER, KATHLEEN SUCHAN, ROBERTA SUCHAN, ROBERT TOWNSEL, DOMINICK VITALE, AND RUTH WARREN INDIVIDUALLY AND/OR ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHER similarly situated individuals, Plaintiffs,
v.
DIETZ & WATSON, INC. Defendant.

          [PROPOSED] FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT APPROVING FLSA AND RULE 23 SETTLEMENT

          Honorable Richard A. Jones, United States District Judge

         The above-titled matter came before this Court upon the Parties' Joint Motion for Final Approval of FLSA and Rule 23 Settlement. Dkt. # 90. The proposed settlement in this case was preliminarily approved by this Court on January 31, 2019. Dkt. # 89. Pursuant to the Court's Preliminary Approval of Settlement Order, the Court conducted a final fairness hearing on May 17, 2019. Having considered the arguments of counsel, all applicable law, and any objections properly made to the proposed settlement, and based upon the memoranda, exhibits, and all the files and proceedings herein, the Court makes the following:

         ORDER

         1. The Court finds that it has personal jurisdiction over all members of the Settlement Class and that it has subject matter jurisdiction over all claims being settled and to approve the Settlement Agreement and all exhibits hereto. This Final Order and Judgment adopts and incorporates the Settlement Agreement, the terms defined therein, and all exhibits thereto.

         2. The parties' Joint Motion for Final Approval of FLSA and Rule 23 Settlement is GRANTED.

         3. The parties' Settlement Agreement is approved as fair, reasonable, and adequate as to the members of the FLSA Collective and Rule 23 California State Law Settlement Class, consistent and in compliance will all requirements of the law, and in the best interest of each of the parties and the members of the Settlement Class. The relief with respect to the Settlement Class is appropriate, as to the individual members of the Settlement Class and as a whole.

         4. The Notices of Settlement approved by the Court were disseminated by U.S. Mail and e-mail to the last known address and e-mail address of each of the Plaintiffs and Rule 23 settlement class members. The Notices adequately described all of the relevant and necessary aspects of the proposed Settlement, the request for service payments to the Named Plaintiffs, and Class Counsel's motion for an award of attorneys' fees and costs.

         5. The Court finds that the Notices given to the Settlement Class Members fully complied with Rule 23, were the best notices practicable, were reasonably calculated under the circumstances to apprise members of the Settlement Class of the pendency of the litigation and their rights with respect to the settlement, and satisfied all applicable requirements of constitutional due process and any other applicable requirements under the law.

         6. The Court directs the parties and their counsel to implement and consummate the Settlement Agreement in accordance with its terms and provisions.

         7. The Settlement Agreement is binding on all Participating Settlement Class Members, as defined in the parties' Settlement Agreement.

         8. The Court finds that Plaintiffs and Class Counsel adequately represented the Settlement Class for the purpose of entering into and implementing the Settlement.

         9. The Court adjudges that Plaintiffs and the Settlement Class have fully, finally, and conclusively compromised, settled, discharged, dismissed, and released any and all Released Claims against Defendant and the Released Parties, as further provided in Paragraph 54 through 58 of the Settlement Agreement.

         10. The Parties are hereby authorized, without further approval from the Court, to agree to and adopt such amendments, modifications, and expansions of the Settlement Agreement and all exhibits thereto as (i) are consistent in all material respects with this Final Order and Judgment, and (ii) do not limit the rights of the Settlement Class members.

         11. This case, including all individual, collective, and class claims presented thereby, is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE, with each party to bear his, her, or its own fees and costs, except as set forth in the Court's order awarding attorneys' fees, costs, and named plaintiff service payments, and with this Court retaining exclusive ...


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.