Meeks at al. v. Consumer Adjustment Company, Inc.

District Court, N.D. California·Decided June 1, 2023·No. 3:21-cv-03266·Unknown

Opinion

1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 3 ELETTRA MEEKS, JOSEPH DELACRUZ, Case No.: 3:21-cv-03266-VC 4 STEPHANIE LAGUNA, AMBER LEONARD, 5 and BECKY WITT, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, 6 [PROPOSED] ORDER PRELIMINARILY Plaintiffs, APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND 7 DIRECTING NOTICE TO CLASS v. 8

9 EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC.; MIDWEST RECOVERY SYSTEMS, 10 LLC; and CONSUMER ADJUSTMENT COMPANY, INC., 11 Defendants. 12

13 This matter comes before the Court on the Joint Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class 14 Action Settlement Agreement. (ECF No. _1_1__3__.) The Settlement Agreement has been filed with the 15 Court, (ECF No. _1_1_7_-_2_), and the definitions and terms set forth in the Settlement Agreement are 16 incorporated herein by reference. 17 The Court, having reviewed the Settlement Agreement entered by the Parties, hereby ORDERS that: 18 1. The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of the Litigation and over each 19 settling party. 20 2. The Court has conducted a preliminary evaluation of the Settlement as set forth in the 21 Settlement Agreement. As explained in Cotter v. Lyft, Inc., 193 F. Supp. 3d 1030, 1036 (N.D. Cal. 22 2016), the Court’s review of the Settlement at preliminary approval is not cursory, it is as rigorous as 23 will be conducted at the final approval stage. The Settlement Agreement entered between the parties 24 as of __J_u_n__e_ 1____, 2023 (ECF No. 1_1_7_-_2_), appears, upon preliminary review, to be fair, reasonable, 25 and adequate to the Settlement Classes. Accordingly, for settlement purposes only, the proposed 26 settlement in preliminarily approved, pending a Final Approval Hearing, as provided for herein. 27 1 The Rule 23(b)(2) Class 2 3. The Court has considered the proposed settlement of the claims asserted by a class 3 of consumers defined as follows (the “Rule 23(b)(2) Settlement Class”): 4 All persons located in the United States (1) for whom CACI contacted in an attempt to collect a debt or communicated credit information about to Experian, Equifax, 5 or Trans Union; (2) arising from a debt where the original creditor of the loan was 6 either Plain Green, Great Plains, or MobiLoans; (3) within one year prior to the filing of this action. 7 4. As to the Rule 23(b)(2) Settlement Class, the prerequisites to a class action under Fed. 8 R. Civ. P. 23(a) have been preliminarily satisfied, for settlement purposes only, in that: 9 a. The Rule 23(b)(2) Settlement Class appears to consist of more than 100 10 members that are geographically dispersed such that joinder of all members is 11 impracticable; 12 b. The Named Plaintiffs’ claims appear to be typical of those of the other members 13 of the Rule 23(b)(2) Settlement Class; 14 c. There appear to be questions of fact and law that are common to all members 15 of the Rule 23(b)(2) Settlement Class; and, 16 d. the Named Plaintiffs appear to be able to fairly and adequately protect the 17 interests of the Rule 23(b)(2) Settlement Class and have retained Class Counsel 18 experienced in consumer class action litigation who appear to be able to 19 adequately represent the Rule 23(b)(2) Settlement Class. 20 5. For settlement purposes only, the Court finds that the Rule 23(b)(2) Settlement Class 21 is preliminarily maintainable as a class action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2) because CACi’s conduct 22 is generally applicable to the Rule 23(b)(2) Settlement Class, so that final injunctive relief as set forth 23 in Section 4.3 of the Settlement Agreement is appropriate respecting the Rule 23(b)(2) Class as a 24 whole. 25 6. Because this portion of the Settlement is for injunctive relief under Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 23(b)(2), there shall be no ability for Rule 23(b)(2) Settlement Class Members to request exclusion 27 1 from the Settlement. All Rule 23(b)(2) Settlement Class Members shall therefore be bound by all 2 subsequent proceedings, orders, and judgments in this action. 3 The Rule 23(b)(3) Class 4 7. The Court has considered the proposed settlement of the claims asserted by the Rule 5 23(b)(3) Settlement Class, defined as: 6 All persons located in the United States (1) for whom CACI collected payment from a consumer; (2) in connection with an account where the original creditor of 7 the loan was either Plain Green, Great Plains, or MobiLoans; (3) within one year prior to the filing of this action. Excluded from the class are all persons who have 8 signed a written release of their claim, counsel in this case, and the Court and its employees. 9 10 8. As to the Rule 23(b)(3) Settlement Class, the prerequisites to a class action under Fed. 11 R. Civ. P. 23(a) have been preliminarily satisfied, for settlement purposes only, in that: 12 a. The Rule 23(b)(3) Settlement Class appears to consist of more than 100 members that 13 are geographically dispersed such that joinder of all members is impracticable; 14 b. The Named Plaintiffs’ claims appear to be typical of those of the other members of the 15 Rule 23(b)(3) Settlement Class; 16 c. There appear to be questions of fact and law that are common to all members of the 17 Rule 23(b)(3) Settlement Class; and 18 d. the Named Plaintiffs appear to be able to fairly and adequately protect the interests of 19 the Rule 23(b)(3) Settlement Class and have retained Class Counsel experienced in 20 consumer class action litigation who appear to be able to adequately represent the Rule 21 23(b)(3) Settlement Class. 22 9. For settlement purposes only, the Court finds that the Rule 23(b)(3) Settlement Class 23 is preliminarily maintainable as a class action under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3) because it appears that 24 class treatment of these claims will be efficient and manageable, thereby achieving an appreciable 25 measure of judicial economy, and that a class action is superior to other available methods for a fair 26 and efficient adjudication of this controversy. 27 10. As to class membership, the Rule 23(b)(3) Class List is determinative. No individual 1 in the Rule 23(b)(3) Settlement Class unless such individual appears on the Rule 23(b)(3) Class List. 2 All Rule 23(b)(3) Settlement Class Members on the Class List shall be given the opportunity to opt 3 out of the Rule 23(b)(3) Settlement Class. Such a consumer may request to be excluded from the Rule 4 23(b)(3) Settlement Class by sending and not revoking a written request for exclusion to the Settlement 5 Administrator, sent to the address listed on the Rule 23(b)(3) Class Notice. To be valid, the proposed 6 Rule 23(b)(3) Settlement Class Member’s opt-out request must contain the proposed Rule 23(b)(3) 7 Settlement Class Member's name, original signature, current postal address, and current telephone 8 number, and a statement that the proposed Rule 23(b)(3) Settlement Class Member wants to be 9 excluded from the class of Rule 23(b)(3) Settlement Class Members. To be valid, opt-out requests 10 must be postmarked no later than ninety days after the Notice Date. To be valid, a request must not 11 purport to opt out of the class of the Rule 23(b)(3) Settlement Class Members for a group, aggregate, 12 or class involving more than one consumer. Requests for exclusions that do not substantially comply 13 with the requirements in this Order are invalid. A Rule 23(b)(3) Settlement Class Member may revoke 14 an opt-out request in writing. To be valid, opt-out revocations must be postmarked no later than the 15 date of the Rule 23(b)(3) Final Judgment and Order. 16 11.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Meeks at al. v. Consumer Adjustment Company, Inc., (N.D. Cal. 2023).

Meeks at al. v. Consumer Adjustment Company, Inc. (Meeks at al. v. Consumer Adjustment Company, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cotter v. Lyft, Inc.
193 F. Supp. 3d 1030 (N.D. California, 2016)