Myers v. Loomis Armored US, LLC

District Court, W.D. North Carolina·Decided December 16, 2019·No. 3:18-cv-00532·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION DOCKET NO. 3:18-cv-00532-FDW-DSC SHAKEERA MYERS, on behalf of herself ) and all others similarly situated, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ORDER and ) NOTICE OF HEARING LOOMIS ARMORED US, LLC, ) ) Defendant. ) )

THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Unopposed Motion for Settlement (Doc. No. 62), submitted by Plaintiff. For the reasons stated in the unopposed motion and supporting memorandum of law (Doc. No. 63), the motion is GRANTED. WHEREAS, Plaintiff Shakeera Myers and Defendant Loomis Armored US, LLC have entered into the Settlement Agreement of Class and Collective Action and Release of Claims (“Settlement Agreement”) (Doc. No. 63-1, p. 3-61), which is intended to resolve claims asserted in this action by Plaintiff; and WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreement, together with its exhibits, set forth the terms and conditions for a proposed settlement and dismissal with prejudice of this action against the Defendant; and WHEREAS, Plaintiff has requested that the Court enter an Order: (1) asserting jurisdiction over the claims alleged, Plaintiff and Defendant in this action, and the implementation and administration of the proposed Settlement Agreement; (2) adjudging the terms of the Settlement Agreement preliminarily to be fair, reasonable and adequate, and in the best interests of the 1 Plaintiff, current opt-in plaintiffs, and members of the settlement classes, and direct consummation of its terms and provisions; (3) approving, as to form and content, the proposed Notice of Proposed Class and Collective Action Settlement (“Notice”) and Claim Form to all members of the Settlement Classes by First Class U.S. Mail and text message and email, as set forth in Article V, Section 5 of the Settlement Agreement (Doc. No. 63-1, p. 35); (4) approving and appointing Angeion Group as the Settlement Administrator who will administer this settlement; (5) setting a sixty (60) calendar day deadline (from the date the Notice and Claim Forms are postmarked to members of the Settlement Classes) for the execution and return of fully completed Claim Forms,

requests for exclusion, or objections; and (6) scheduling a Final Approval Hearing for a date no sooner than ninety (90) days after the date of this Order on Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class and Collective Action Settlement (Doc. No. 62); and WHEREAS, the Court has before it, Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class and Collective Action Settlement (Doc. No. 62) and papers in support thereof, together with the Settlement Agreement and its Exhibits (Doc. No. 63-1); and WHEREAS, the Court is satisfied that the terms and conditions set forth in the Settlement Agreement were the result of good faith, arms’ length settlement negotiations between competent and experienced counsel for Plaintiff and Defendant; and WHEREAS, having reviewed and considered the Settlement Agreement and

accompanying Exhibits, the Plaintiff’s Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class and Collective Action Settlement (Doc. No. 62), and having considered the argument of counsel, the Court makes the findings and grants the relief set forth below, authorizing notice of the settlement contained in the Settlement Agreement upon the terms and conditions set forth in this order. 2 WHEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AS FOLLOWS: Standard of Review 1. The standards for preliminary approval of a class settlement under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e) involves a two-step process. Matthews v. Cloud 10 Corp., No. 3:14-cv-00646-FDW-DSC, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114586, at *3 (W.D.N.C. Aug. 27, 2015). First, there must be “[p]reliminary approval of the proposed settlement at an informal hearing and dissemination of mailed and/or published notice of the settlement to all affected Class Members.” Id.; see also Beaulieu v. EQ Indus. Servs., No. 5:06-CV-400-BR, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133023, at *69

(E.D.N.C. Apr. 20, 2009) (Magistrate Judge Memorandum and Recommendation); Manual for Complex Litigation § 21.632 (5th ed. 2004). The second step, “if preliminary approval is given and class notice is sent, the court conducts a fairness hearing at which all interested persons may be heard and then makes a final determination on approval.” Beaulieu, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 133023, at *69; see also Manual for Complex Litigation, supra, § 21.633. At the preliminary stage, the “judge must make a preliminary determination on the fairness, reasonableness, and adequacy of the settlement terms and must direct the preparation of notice of the certification, proposed settlement, and date of the final fairness hearing.” Matthews, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 114586, at *4 (quotations omitted). “There is a strong judicial policy in favor of settlements, particularly in the class action context.” Case v. Plantation Title Co., No. 9:12-CV-2518-DCN-BM, 2015 U.S.

Dist. LEXIS 33580, at *22 (D.S.C. Mar. 5, 2015) (quotation omitted). Notice to Settlement Classes, Opt-In Procedure, and Appointment of Claims Administrator 2. The Court authorizes notice of the settlement set forth in the Settlement Agreement as it appears fair, reasonable, and adequate within the meaning of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 and the Class 3 Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”), subject to final consideration thereof at the Final Approval Hearing provided for below. 3. The Court approves as to form and content the Notice, Reminder Postcard and Claim Form, attached as Exhibits A-1, A-2, and A-3 to the Settlement Agreement, see (Doc. No. 63-1), and the manner of notice set forth in Article V of the Settlement Agreement.1 4. The manner and forms of Notice to be sent to members of the Settlement Classes set forth in Article V of the Settlement Agreement are hereby approved and the provisions thereof are hereby incorporated into this Order so that upon entry of this Order, the Parties are directed to

ensure that the Notice is disseminated according to the terms of Article V, Section 5 of the Settlement Agreement. 5. Members of the Settlement Classes are authorized to receive a settlement payment only by timely submitting a properly completed Claim Form to the Settlement Administrator via U.S. Mail, fax, or email so that it is postmarked, if received by U.S. Mail, or received, if sent by fax or email, on or before the date sixty (60) calendar days after the date on which the Settlement Administrator postmarks or texts the Notice and Claim Form to the members of the Settlement Classes, in accordance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement. The Claim Form must be completed in accordance with the instructions in the Notice and Claim Form and comply with the requirements set forth in the Notice and Settlement Agreement. All members of the Settlement

1 The Court presumes the parties will fill in the appropriate information on the notice and reminder notice where it is missing, as it appears the parties are waiting for the entry of this order to fill in those regions. See, e.g., (Doc. No. 63- 1, p. 63) (listing “[60 CALENDAR DAYS FROM MAILING]” as the deadline to return Claim Forms). The Court also perceives a typographical error on page 9 of the Notice. See (Doc. No.63-1, p. 71) (stating “Any Rule 23 Settlement Class Member – that is, any AST who was employed by Loomis at any point after February 16, 2016 . . . .”) (emphasis added). This appears to conflict with Section 5(b) of the Notice, see (Doc. No. 63-1, p. 66), which states the class members were employed by Defendant at any time after October 1, 2016. 4 Classes who fail to comply with these requirements shall not receive any settlement payment pursuant to the Settlement set forth in the Settlement Agreement.

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

Myers v. Loomis Armored US, LLC, (W.D.N.C. 2019).

Myers v. Loomis Armored US, LLC (Myers v. Loomis Armored US, LLC) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Writs
28 U.S.C. § 1651(a)