Plaintiff’s Motion for Final Approval
Browse all Motion for Final Approval of Class Settlement rulings statewide →
7. Does the UCL claim have any independent value, or does it simply extend the limitations period?
8. The definition of “Released Claims” at § 5.2 includes “all claims that arise from the claims and legal theories and primary rights associated with the claims alleged in the Operative Complaint, amended complaints, and the PAGA Notice.” (Emphasis added.) Have any amended complaints been filed in this matter?
9. At final approval, please submit contemporaneously made billing records for attorney’s fees and costs. The Court will not be inclined to award an amount of fees and costs greater than the amount stated in the notice.
10. At final approval, please submit billing records for administrative costs. The Court will not be inclined to award administrative costs in an amount greater than the amount stated in the notice.
11. Because Plaintiff has submitted a declaration in support of her requested enhancement payment, she need not submit one at final approval.
12. At final approval, the administrator is to provide a high, low, and average for individual settlement payments, along with Plaintiff’s individual payout.
As to the Notice:
1. On page 3 of the notice, please delete the description of the mediator as “experienced, neutral” and the agreement as “lengthy.” This is a court-ordered notice, so these descriptions could be construed as the Court’s official views.
2. Please include opt-out and workweek or wedding dispute forms (but not an objection form) with the notice.
3. Is notice required in any languages other than English?
4. If any changes are made to the settlement agreement, please make corresponding changes to the notice.
5. The font size in the actual notice may not be smaller than the font size in the proposed notice provided to the Court.
4 Radmer vs. Beachwood Motel
2022-01261800
Plaintiff’s Motion for Final Approval
Plaintiff’s motion for final approval of the parties’ class action settlement is GRANTED. The Court approves the following distributions:
1. Attorney’s fees in the amount of $215,000. The Court finds this amount to be a reasonable result in light of the quality of the result obtained, the work performed by class counsel, a review of the billing records provided, and the claimed lodestar. Because counsel seek recovery on a lodestar basis rather than a common fund basis, the Court finds their claimed rates ($700 for Yashdeep Singh and $850 for Gerald Ohn) to be reasonable for attorneys of similar skill and tenure in the market.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
2. Litigation costs in the amount of $16,003. From review of the cost records provided, it appears both Mr. Singh and Mr. Ohn claimed $1,492.52 in initial filing fees. As far as the Court is aware, there is only one case, so counsel will be permitted to recover only one initial filing fee. All other costs are approved.
3. Administration costs in the amount of $7,500, per the administrator’s declaration.
4. An enhancement of $5,000 to Plaintiff. In making this award, the Court has considered only the factors set forth in Golba v. Dick’s Sporting Goods, Inc. (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 1251 and Clark v. Am. Residential Servs. LLC (2009) 175 Cal.App.4th 785.
Pursuant to section 384(b) of the Code of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff shall submit to the Court a final report on or before January 30, 2027 setting forth the actual amounts paid to class members and other amounts disbursed pursuant to the settlement. Upon receiving the report, the Court will determine whether further reports and/or a hearing will be necessary.
Please submit a revised proposed order for the Court’s signature that conforms to the foregoing. 5 Gordon vs. Summit Medical Staffing LLC 2025-01468470
Plaintiff’s Motion for Final Approval Plaintiff’s motion for final approval of the parties’ class action settlement will be GRANTED subject to the parties explaining (1) why the workweeks tally at final approval (4,314) varied so much from the estimated number of workweeks at the preliminary approval stage (6,486); and (2) Plaintiff’s individual share of the settlement. Assuming those issues are addressed, then the Court intends to approve the following distributions:
1. Attorney’s fees in the amount of $97,500, or 30% of the GSA. The Court finds this amount to be a reasonable result in light of the quality of the result obtained, the work performed by class counsel, a review of the billing records provided, and the estimated lodestar. In approving this amount and examining the billing records provided, the Court is not approving any particular hourly billing rates proposed by class counsel.
2. Litigation costs in the amount of $24,798, the full amount claimed in the costs ledger.
3. Administration costs in the amount of $6,750, per the administrator’s declaration.