Gee et al v. Suntrust Mortgage, Inc., No. 3:2010cv01509 - Document 141 (N.D. Cal. 2012)
Court Description: ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND FINAL JUDGMENT. Signed by Judge Richard Seeborg on 5/14/12. (cl, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 5/14/2012)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Gee et al v. Suntrust Mortgage, Inc. Doc. 141 1 2 3 4 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 6 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 7 SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION 8 9 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 GARY GEE, ROXANNE MAZARAKIS, and JODY SOTO, individually, and on behalf of all similarly situated others, No. C 10-01509 RS Plaintiffs, 12 13 14 15 16 ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND FINAL JUDGMENT v. SUNTRUST MORTGAGE, INC., and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendants. ____________________________________/ This matter is before the Court on the Parties’ Joint Motion to Approve Collective Action 17 Settlement (“Joint Motion”), seeking approval of the settlement of the above-captioned 18 conditionally certified collective action for unpaid compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act 19 (“FLSA”), 29 U.S.C. § 201, et seq. and California state wage and hour law, and to dismiss the case, 20 with prejudice. Having reviewed the Parties’ Joint Motion and considered the entire record in this 21 Action, and otherwise for good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 22 23 24 25 26 1. This Order and Final Judgment incorporates by reference the definitions set forth in the Joint Motion, and all terms used herein shall have the same meaning as set forth in the Joint Motion. 2. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this Action and over the Parties to this Action. 3. All terms and conditions of the settlement as described and set forth in the Joint Motion 27 are approved. The Court finds that the terms of the settlement and the releases that have been 28 executed by the individual Plaintiffs are fair, reasonable, and adequate. The Court also finds that the NO. C 10-01509 RS ORDER Dockets.Justia.com 1 terms of the settlement of this Action were the result of good faith, arms-length negotiations by the 2 Parties, and that the terms of the settlement represent a reasonable compromise of disputed claims 3 and issues arising from a bona fide dispute over coverage and liability under the FLSA and 4 California wage and hour laws. 5 6 7 8 9 4. This Action and all of the Released Claims are hereby dismissed, with prejudice. Except as otherwise provided in the Joint Motion, the Parties are to bear their own costs and fees. 5. All Plaintiffs are hereby forever barred and enjoined from prosecuting any of the Released Claims against Defendant or any Released Party. 6. Neither the terms of the settlement as described in the Joint Motion nor any act performed or document executed pursuant to or in furtherance of the settlement of this Action (a) shall be 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 construed as or deemed to be an admission of liability, damages, culpability, negligence, or 12 wrongdoing on the part of Defendant or the Released Parties, or (b) shall be admissible in evidence 13 in any judicial or administrative proceeding in any federal, state or local forum or jurisdiction, 14 except (i) in an action or proceeding to approve, interpret, or enforce the terms of the settlement or 15 (ii) by Defendant or any Released Party in an action brought against Defendant or any Released 16 Party to support a defense or counterclaim based upon principles of res judicata, collateral estoppel, 17 release, good faith settlement, judgment bar or reduction or any other theory of claim preclusion or 18 issue preclusion or similar defense or counterclaim. 19 7. Plaintiffs’ Counsel has fairly and adequately represented the interests of all of the 20 Plaintiffs in this Action. Plaintiffs’ Counsel has provided adequate notice to the Plaintiffs in this 21 Action, and the notice fully satisfies the requirements and the procedures for a collective action 22 under the FLSA, as well as the requirements of due process. 23 8. Without affecting the finality of this Order and Final Judgment in any way, this Court 24 hereby retains continuing jurisdiction for the limited purpose of ensuring the implementation and 25 enforcement of the terms of the settlement. 26 27 IT IS SO ORDERED. 28 NO. C 10-01509 RS ORDER 2 1 Dated: 5/14/12 2 3 RICHARD SEEBORG UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 4 5 6 7 8 9 11 For the Northern District of California United States District Court 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NO. C 10-01509 RS ORDER 3
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
