Schiller v. David's Bridal, Inc.

• Decision Date: 11 June 2012
• Docket Number: CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00616-AWI-SKO
• Parties: ESTELLA SCHILLER, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated, and as an aggrieved employee pursuant to the Private Attorneys General Act, Plaintiff, v. DAVID'S BRIDAL, INC., a Florida Corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Eastern District of California

ESTELLA SCHILLER, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated,and as an aggrieved employee pursuant to the Private Attorneys General Act, Plaintiff,

v.DAVID'S BRIDAL, INC., a Florida Corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants.

CASE NO. 1:10-cv-00616-AWI-SKO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Dated: June 11, 2012

FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS THAT:

THE MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT BE GRANTED

(Doc. No. 48)

THE MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES BE GRANTED

(Doc. No. 49)

OBJECTIONS DUE: 14 DAYS

I. INTRODUCTION

On March 9, 2012, Plaintiff Estella Schiller filed motions for final approval of a class action settlement, for an award of attorneys' fees, and for an enhancement award for Plaintiff as class representative.¹ (Docs. 48, 49.) No opposition to the motions was filed, and no objection by a Class Member was submitted. The matter was heard on May 16, 2012; Arthur Meneses, Esq., of Initiative Legal Group APC appeared on behalf of Plaintiff, and Cary Palmer, Esq., of Jackson Lewis LLPappeared on behalf of Defendant David's Bridal, Inc. ("David's Bridal" or "Defendant"). No Class Member appeared at the hearing. For the reasons set forth below, the Court RECOMMENDS that Plaintiff's motions for (1) final approval of the class action settlement, (2) an award of attorneys' fees, and (3) an enhancement award to Plaintiff as class representative be GRANTED.

II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND

This case was filed on January 15, 2010 (Doc. 1, Exh. A, p. 3), in Stanislaus County Superior Court and was removed by Defendant to federal court on April 8, 2010. (Doc. 1.) The complaint stated putative class wage-and-hour claims alleging that Defendant failed to (1) pay overtime wages; (2) provide meal periods and pay meal period premiums; (3) reimburse for necessary business-related expenses and costs; (4) pay minimum wages; (5) timely pay wages upon termination; (6) timely pay wages during employment; (7) provide accurate and itemized wage statements; and (8) comply with the California Business & Professions Code §§ 17200 et seq. (Doc. 1, Exh. A; Doc. 37.)² The complaint also sought penalties under the California Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 ("PAGA"). Plaintiff unsuccessfully challenged Defendant's removal to federal court. (Doc. 23.) Discovery commenced in September 2010. (See Doc. 31.) A Second Amended Complaint alleging the same claims was filed on June 29, 2011. (Doc. 37.)

On May 4, 2011, the parties mediated their dispute with David Rotman, Esq., and after approximately 10 hours of negotiation, the parties reached a settlement of Plaintiff's claims. (Williams Decl., Doc. 39-1, ¶ 8.) The parties memorialized the terms of their proposed settlement in a "Joint Stipulation of Settlement and Release Between Plaintiff and Defendant" ("Settlement Agreement") (Doc. 39-1, Exh. 1), and on October 7, 2011, filed a request for preliminary approval of the class settlement. (Doc. 39.) On November 9, 2011, the Court granted preliminary approval for the settlement, authorized the notice process, and scheduled a hearing to consider final approval of the settlement. (Doc. 46.) On March 9, 2012, Plaintiff filed a Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement ("Motion for Final Approval"), a motion for attorneys' fees, and a request for anenhancement award. (Docs. 48, 49.) Defendant filed a statement of non-opposition to Plaintiff's motions. (Doc. 54.) On April 9, 2012, the Court issued an order for supplemental briefing and reset the hearing on Plaintiff's motions to May 16, 2012. (Doc. 55.) A hearing was held on May 16, 2012, and Plaintiff's motions were submitted for decision.

III. THE PARTIES' SETTLEMENT

On October 7, 2011, the parties filed a Notice of Settlement, indicating that they had negotiated a resolution of their dispute. (Doc. 39.) The terms of the parties' Settlement Agreement is summarized below.

A. The Composition of the Settlement Classes

The Settlement Agreement provides for the certification, for settlement purposes only, of two classes comprised of (1) all salaried store employees of David's Bridal in California between January 1, 2007, and November 9, 2011; and (2) all hourly store employees of David's Bridal in California between January 1, 2007, and November 9, 2011 (the "Settlement Classes"). (Doc. 39-1, Exh. A, ¶ 5.) The parties agreed that the Settlement Classes would not include any person who previously settled or released any of the claims covered by the Settlement Agreement, or any person who previously was paid or received awards through civil or administrative actions for the claims covered by the Settlement Agreement. (Doc. 39-1, Exh. 1, ¶ 5.)

B. The Material Terms of the Settlement Agreement

Plaintiff and Defendant have agreed to settle the underlying class claims in exchange for a "Maximum Settlement Amount," which totals $518,245.00.³ The Maximum Settlement Amount includes:

(1) A payment of 33 1/3 percent of the Maximum Settlement Amount for attorneys' fees and up to $25,000 in costs to be paid to Class Counsel, (Doc. 39-1, Exh. 1, ¶ 16);(2) A payment of $5,000 to Plaintiff as the class representative, (Doc. 39-1, Exh. 1, ¶ 14(c)(v));

(3) A payment of $7,500 to the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency for payment of civil penalties, (Doc. 39-1, Exh. 1, ¶ 14(c)); and

(4) The costs of administration of settlement to Simpluris, Inc., the settlement administrator, up to $30,000, (Doc. 39, 15:18);⁴

The remainder of the settlement amount, after deduction of the above-noted payments, constitutes the "Net Settlement Amount" and will be used to pay the Class Members. (Doc. 39-1, Exh. 1, ¶ 14(c).) After deductions, there will be approximately $286,078.00 remaining as the Net Settlement which will be distributed as follows:

(1) Class Members who submit valid and timely claim forms are entitled to payment from the Net Settlement Amount, (Doc. 39-1, Exh. 1, ¶ 14(c));

(2) No matter how many Class Members submit valid claim forms, at least 55% of the Net Settlement Amount will be paid to Participating Class Members, (Doc. 39-1, Exh. 1, ¶ 14(c));

(3) If less than 55% of the Net Settlement is claimed, the difference between 55% of the Net Settlement Amount and the Net Settlement Amount claimed will be distributed to the Participating Class Members in proportion to their recovery under the Settlement (Doc. 39-1, Exh. 1, ¶ 13); and

(4) Any Net Settlement Amount in excess of 55% that is not claimed by Participating Class Members will be retained by Defendant (Doc. 39-1, Exh. 1, ¶ 14(c)).

C. The Scope of the Release in the Settlement Agreement

The parties' Settlement Agreement sets forth the following release by the Class Members:

21. Upon final approval by the Court of this Stipulation of Settlement, and except as to such rights or claims as may be created by this Stipulation of Settlement, the Hourly Associate Class and the Store Manager Class, and each member of those Classes who has not submitted a valid Request for Exclusion, fully releases and discharges Defendant, its present and former parent companies, subsidiaries, related or affiliated companies, shareholders, officers, directors, employees, agents,attorneys, insurers, successors and assigns, and any individual or entity which could be jointly liable with Defendant, from any and all claims, debts, liabilities, demands, obligations, guarantees, costs, expenses, attorneys' fees, damages, action or causes of action under any state, federal or local law, arising out [of ] the allegations made in the Action and that reasonably arise out of the facts alleged in the Action.

(Doc. 39-1, Exh. 1, ¶ 21.)

1. Claims Released by the Hourly Associate Class

a. The claims to be released by the Hourly Associate Class include all claims under state, federal, and local law arising out of the allegations made in the Lawsuit and that reasonably arise out of the facts alleged in the Lawsuit as to the Hourly Associate Class, including claims for alleged unpaid wages, unpaid overtime wages, unpaid minimum wages, off-the-clock work regular rate of pay, unreimbursed business expenses, failure to provide meal periods or pay meal period premiums, failure to provide rest periods or pay rest period premium payments, failure to timely pay wages during employment, failure to timely pay wages at separation, failure to provide accurate and itemized wage statements, failure to maintain payroll records as required by law, additional 401(k) benefits and/or deferred compensation benefits and/or matching benefits for payments received under the Settlement, unfair competition, unfair business practices, unlawful business practices, fraudulent business practices, injunctive relief, penalties, interest, fees, costs, claims for restitution and other equitable relief, liquidated damages, and any other claims and allegations made in the Lawsuit and that arise out of the facts alleged in the Lawsuit, from January 1, 2007[,] up to and including the date of this Final Order, arising from employment by Defendant within California ("Hourly Associate Released Claims"). The Released Claims do not include workers' compensation claims. In addition, as of the date of the final approval of the Settlement, the Class Representative and the Settlement Class and each member of the Class who has not submitted a valid Request for Exclusion will be forever [] barred and enjoined from instituting or accepting damages or obtaining relief against Defendant for any acts or omissions occurring during the period from January 1, 2007[,] up to and including the date of entry of the final approval order, relating to the Released Claims.

(Doc. 39-1, Exh. 1, ¶ 21(a).)

2. Claims to be Released by the Store Manager Class

b. The claims to be released by the Store Manager Class include all claims under state, federal, and local law arising out of the allegations made in the Lawsuit and that reasonably arise out of the facts alleged in the Lawsuit as

...