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.

David v. Bankers Life And Casualty Company

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle

June 3, 2019

CHRISTINE DAVID and RODNEY CLURE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v.
BANKERS LIFE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, a foreign corporation, Defendant.

          SCHROETER GOLDMARK & BENDER Lindsay L. Halm, WSBA #37141 Attorneys for Plaintiffs

          LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. Ryan P. Hammond, WSBA #38888 Attorneys for Defendant

          ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

          ROBERT S. LASNIK, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         This matter comes before the Court on the parties' stipulated Motion for Preliminary Approval of a Class Action Settlement. The Court has considered the motion together with the supporting declaration and exhibits and the record on file with the Court. For the reasons set forth below, the Court GRANTS the motion and preliminarily approves of the parties' class-wide settlement.

         A. Standard of Review

         A party seeking to certify a settlement class must establish that the requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 23 (“Rule 23”) are met. Amchem Prods., Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591, 617 (1997). A court must engage in a “rigorous analysis” to determine whether the requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 23 are satisfied. Gen. Tel. Co. of the Southwest v. Falcon, 457 U.S. 147, 161 (1982). However, the evidentiary showing need not be extensive. Blackie v. Barrack, 524 F.2d 891, 901 (9th Cir. 1975).

         In addition, the Court must satisfy itself that the proposed class-wide settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable to the class. Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(e); see also Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp., 150 F.3d 1011, 1026 (9th Cir. 1998). In conducting such analysis, federal courts consider the following factors:

[T]he strength of the plaintiffs' case; the risk, expense, complexity, and likely duration of further litigation; the risk of maintaining class action status throughout the trial; the amount offered in settlement; the extent of discovery completed and the stage of the proceedings; the experience and views of counsel; the presence of a governmental participant; and the reaction of the class members to the proposed settlement.

Hanlon, 150 F.3d at 1026 (citing Torrisi v. Tucson Elec. Power Co., 8 F.3d 1370, 1375 (9th Cir. 1993)).

         B. The Proposed Settlement Class Satisfies Fed.R.Civ.P. 23

         To be certified under Rule 23, Plaintiffs and the proposed Settlement Class must satisfy all the requirements of Rule 23(a): (1) the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable (“numerosity”), (2) there are questions of law or fact common to the class (“commonality”), (3) the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class (“typicality”), and (4) the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class (“adequacy”). In addition, the proposed Settlement Class must satisfy the requirements of superiority and predominance under Rule 23(b)(3). Predominance is similar to the inquiry on commonality, but focuses on whether the proposed class is “sufficiently cohesive to warrant adjudication by representation.” Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591, 623 (1997). Superiority requires that a class action be superior to other available methods for adjudication.

         For the reasons set forth below, the Court certifies the following Settlement Class:

Agents assigned to the Bellevue Branch or one of its satellite offices during the period June 22, 2008 to July 30, 2011 who had twelve or fewer months' tenure during that period.

         1. ...


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.