What is a Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement?

After the Court has held a preliminary approval hearing, it may grant final approval of a class action settlement. (Rules of Ct. 3.769(a); Dunk v. Ford Motor Co. (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1794, 1800.)

In order to grant final approval of a class action settlement, the Court must find that the settlement is “fair, adequate, and reasonable.” (Wershba v. Apple Computer (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 224, 244-245.) The burden is on the proponent of the settlement to show that it is fair and reasonable. (Wershba v. Apple Computer (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 245.)

“[A] presumption of fairness exists where:

  1. the settlement is reached through arm's-length bargaining;
  2. investigation and discovery are sufficient to allow counsel and the court to act intelligently;
  3. counsel is experienced in similar litigation; and
  4. the percentage of objectors is small.”

(Dunk v. Ford Motor Company (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1794, 1802.)

The Court also considers such factors as “the strength of plaintiffs' case, the risk, expense, complexity and likely duration of further litigation, the risk of maintaining class action status through 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 class members to the proposed settlement.” (Dunk v. Ford Motor Company (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1794, 1801.)

“The list of factors is not exclusive and the court is free to engage in a balancing and weighing of factors depending on the circumstances of each case.” (Wershba v. Apple 18 Computer, Inc., supra, 91 Cal.App.4th 245.) The court must examine the “proposed settlement agreement to the extent necessary to reach a reasoned judgment that the agreement is not the product of fraud or overreaching by, or collusion between, the negotiating parties.” (Id.)

Before final approval of a class action settlement, notice must be given to the class. (Cal. Rules of Court 3.769(e), (f).)

Certification of the class and the awarded attorney fee must also be deemed proper. (Dunk v. Ford Motor Co. (1996) 48 8 Cal.App.4th 1794.)

Useful Rulings on Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement

Recent Rulings on Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement

2526-2550 of 2623 results

TONY PONCE ET AL VS GOLDEN STATE OVERNIGHT DELIVERY SERVICE

Nature of Proceedings: Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement Santa Barbara County Superior Court Department 5 Judge Colleen K. Sterne Tentative Ruling (Amended) June 24, 2013 Case: Tony Ponce, et al., v. Golden State Overnight Delivery Service, Inc., Case No. 1304491 (Consolidated with 1370536 and 1371497) Matter: Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement Tentative Ruling: The court grants final approval of the class action settlement.

  • Hearing

NEFTALI V AGUILAR VS BLH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY

The decision to give preliminary approval to a proposed class action settlement is not a commitment to approve the final settlement; rather, it is a determination that there are no obvious deficiencies and the settlement falls within the range of reason. (Gates v. Rohm and Haas Co. (E.D.Pa. 2008) 248 F.R.D. 434, 438.) At the preliminary approval stage, a court determines whether a proposed settlement is "within the range of possible approval" and whether or not notice should be sent to class members.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Insurance

  • Sub Type

    Intellectual Property

AARON MARTINEZ VS. TAKE-TWO INTERACTIVE SOFTWARE, INC., A DELAWARE ET AL

Ntc Of Motion For Final Approval Of Class Action Settlement SET FOR HEARING ON FRIDAY, May 31, 2013, Line 3, PLAINTIFFs AARON MARTINEZ and JONATHAN CARROZZO's Motion For Final Approval Of Class Action Settlement Hearing required.

  • Hearing

ELIZABETH FLANAGAN VS WELLS FARGO BANK N.A.

Tentative Ruling: The Court grants the motion for order granting final approval to class action settlement. The Court will enter an order approving the class action settlement, dismissal of the action, with prejudice to class members who do not opt out and without prejudice to class members who have opted out. The Court will determine what individuals have opted out based on the presentation at the hearing and include those names in exhibit 1 to the judgment.

  • Hearing

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

SHERAE DRAKE ET AL VS. JOHN STEWART COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION ET AL

Ntc Of Mtn And Mtn 1) Preliminary Approving Class Action Settlement 2) Authorizing Distribution Of Ntc Of Settlement 3) Setting Schedule For Final Approval Process Matter on calendar for Monday, May 20, 2013, Line 5, PLAINTIFFs SHERAE DRAKE, STARR WILLIAMS & MARCUS HAYES' motion 1) for Preliminary Approving Class Action Settlement 2) Authorizing Distribution Of notice Of Settlement 3) Setting Schedule For Final Approval Process. Hearing required. =(302/RAK)

  • Hearing

SHERAE DRAKE ET AL VS. JOHN STEWART COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION ET AL

Ntc Of Mtn And Mtn 1) Preliminary Approving Class Action Settlement 2) Authorizing Distribution Of Ntc Of Settlement 3) Setting Schedule For Final Approval Process Matter on calendar for Friday, May 10, 2013, Line 3, PLAINTIFFs SHERAE DRAKE, STARR WILLIAMS & MARCUS HAYES' motion 1) for Preliminary Approving Class Action Settlement 2) Authorizing Distribution Of Ntc Of Settlement 3) Setting Schedule For Final Approval Process.

  • Hearing

JAMES HALL VS. O.C. JONES & SONS, INC. ET AL

Application For A) Final Approval Of Class Action Settlement B) Approving Request For Attorneys' Fees And Costs; C) Approving Payment Of Claims Administration Costs And; D) Approving Request For Incentive Parment To Class Representative James Hall Matter on calendar for Friday, May 10, 2013, Line 12, PLAINTIFF JAMES HALL's Application For A) Final Approval Of Class Action Settlement B) Approving Request For Attorneys' Fees And Costs; C) Approving Payment Of Claims Administration Costs And D) Approving Request

  • Hearing

CARL KARCHER WAGE AND HOUR (HOURLY) CASES

At this hearing counsel will advise the Court of the dates and time lines being contemplated for filing of the Motion for a Hearing on Final Approval of Settlement (see Exhibit 4 to Mr. Bradley’s declaration) and the date contemplated for that hearing.

  • Hearing

DANIELLA TODOROVA ET AL VS DLP MANAGEMENT CO. INC. ET AL

The hearing on final approval of the class settlement will be on July 26, 2013 at 9:30 a.m.

  • Hearing

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

RYAN REED VS. THOUSAND OAKS TOYOTA

The court's tentative ruling is to: Continue the hearing on Plaintiff Ryan Reed's motion for final approval of class action settlement for a period of approximately 3 weeks, in order to give Plaintiff the opportunity to serve Defendant Thousand Oaks Toyota (TOT) with notice of the continued hearing and Plaintiff's moving papers unless Defendant TOT appears at the hearing on this matter and waives any defects in notice and service.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

RYAN REED VS. THOUSAND OAKS TOYOTA

The court therefore revises the tentative as follows: The court's tentative ruling is to: Approve Plaintiff Ryan Reed's Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement . The Court finds that Plaintiff Ryan Reed submits sufficient evidence in the form of the declaration of Plaintiff's counsel Brian J. Mankin of the factors enunciated in Dunk v.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

BORIS JAMES DAVISON VS. ACADEMY OF ART UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ET AL

Ntc Of Mtn And Mtn For Final Approval Of Class Action Settlement Matter on calendar for Tuesday, April 2, 2013, Line 3, PLAINTIFF BORIS DAVISON's Motion For Final Approval Of Class Action Settlement. Hearing Reguired. =(302/EHG)

  • Hearing

BORIS JAMES DAVISON VS. ACADEMY OF ART UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION ET AL

Hearing For Final Approval Of Class Action Settlement Matter on calendar for Tuesday, April 2, 2013, Line 3, Hearing For Final Approval Of Class Action Settlement. Off Calendar. Duplicate Entry. =(302/EHG)

  • Hearing

DAVID VINAS ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED VS. NATIONAL VISION INC

Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement, and for approval of attorneys' fees and costs, filed by Plaintiffs. The Court issues the following tentative ruling for the March 29, 2013 hearing on Plaintiff David Vinas' unopposed motions for final approval of class action settlement and for approval of class counsel's attorneys' fees and costs, claims administration fees, and class representative's service payment.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

GUADALUPE URSUA VS GULBRANSON SERVICES INC

Nature of Proceedings: Motion: Final Approval of Class Action Settlement; Hearing: Final Fairness Re: Settlement Tentative Ruling: The court grants plaintiff Guadalupe Ursua’s motion for final approval of class action settlement and certification of provisional settlement class. The court approves the class settlement.

  • Hearing

ELIZABETH FLANAGAN VS WELLS FARGO BANK NA

Nature of Proceedings: Motion: Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement Background: This is a class action filed by plaintiff Elizabeth Flanagan, individually and on behalf of those similarly situated, against defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (“WFB”). The action arises out of WFB’s repeated debit charges on Flanagan’s business checking account for WFB’s Business Checking Debit Card Rewards Program in which Flanagan never enrolled and for which she never authorized a charge.

  • Hearing

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

TONY PONCE ET AL VS GOLDEN STATE OVERNIGHT DELIVERY SERVICE

Pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.769(f), the final approval hearing shall be held on June 24, 2013, at 9:30 a.m., in this department. Plaintiffs’ motion for final approval of the class action settlement, as well as the application for attorneys’ fees, costs, and enhancement payments to the class representatives, shall be submitted at least 16 court days before the final approval hearing.

  • Hearing

GUADALUPE URSUA V. GULBRANSON SERVICES, INC.

The deadline for filing supplemental briefs and declarations regarding final approval of the settlement and requests for attorney fees and reimbursement of costs shall be March 14, 2013.

  • Hearing

RYAN REED VS. THOUSAND OAKS TOYOTA

The court's tentative ruling is to: Grant Plaintiff Ryan Reed's request for preliminary approval of the proposed Class Action settlement. Certify a provisional settlement class, as defined in the Settlement Agreement attached as Exhibit A to the declaration of Plaintiff's counsel Brian Mankin. Execute the proposed order submitted by Plaintiff's counsel, correcting the erroneous reference to "Department 6" in the bottom entry on page 3 of the proposed Order.

  • Hearing

  • Type

    Employment

  • Sub Type

    Other Employment

GUADALUPE RAMIREZ ET AL VS CERVINI FARMS CALIFORNIA INC

Nature of Proceedings: Final Hearing; Motion: Final Approval of Class Action Settlement Complaint: After reaching a settlement of a wage and hour dispute through mediation, representative plaintiffs Guadalupe Ramirez, Guadalupe Gutierrez and Salvador Arevalo filed a class action complaint against defendant Cervini Farms California, Inc. for purposes of effectuating the class settlement. Defendant has not appeared in the action, though attorney Robert P.

  • Hearing

  • Judge Donna Geck
  • County

    Santa Barbara County, CA

WILDA L. WHITE VS. KSL CAPITAL PARTNERS LLC ET AL

Final Approval Hearing Re: Class Action Settlement Set for hearing on Friday, November 30, 2012, Line 8. Final Approval Hearing Re: Class Action Settlement. Hearing required. = (302/MJM)

  • Hearing

WILDA L. WHITE VS. KSL CAPITAL PARTNERS LLC ET AL

Final Approval Hearing Re: Class Action Settlement Matter on calendar for Tuesday, November 13, 2012, Line 12, Final Approval Hearing Re: Class Action Settlement. Hearing required. The proposed order granting preliminary approval of the settlement, though submitted to Department 302, was inadvertently not received by Judge Kahn. Judge Kahn is not available.

  • Hearing

MARIANNE MONTY VS GERALD FORD ET AL

Ford, et al Case No. 1385564 Matter: Unopposed Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement; Unopposed Motion to Award Attorneys’ Fees and Reimburse Litigation Expenses Tentative Ruling: The unopposed motions for final approval of the class action settlement and an award of attorneys’ fees and expenses are approved. Class counsel are awarded attorneys’ fees of $928,770.60 and expenses of $71,229.40. Judgment is ordered entered in favor of plaintiffs.

  • Hearing

RAEL ENTEEN, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL VS. MERIDIAN MANAGEMENT GROUP ET AL

Notice Of Motion And Joint Motion For Final Approval Of Class Action Settlement And Award Of Attorneys' Fees And Expenses; Proof Of Service Matter on calendar for Tuesday, October 16, 2012, Line 9, PLAINTIFF RAEL ENTEEN, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHER SIMILARLY SITUATED'S Joint Motion For Final Approval Of Class Action Settlement And Award Of Attorneys' Fees And Expenses. Hearing required. =(302/HEK)

  • Hearing

MARCO RUELAS VS. TOP PRODUCTIONS, LLC ET AL

MOTION For Final Approval Of Class Action Settlement Matter on calendar for Thursday, September 27, 2012, Line 2, PLAINTIFF JOSE ROBERTO PENA, ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND THOSE SIMILARLY SITUATED'S MOTION For Final Approval Of Class Action Settlement. Hearing required. =(302/HEK)

  • Hearing

  « first    1 ... 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105     last » 

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Please wait a moment while we load this page.