From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Djukich v. Carwell, LLC

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California, Western Division
Nov 24, 2015
CV13-4455 BRO (AGRx) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 24, 2015)

Opinion


PAVEL DJUKICH, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. CARWELL, LLC D/B/A MERCEDES-BENZ OF SOUTH BAY, and DOES 2 through 100, inclusive, Defendants. No. CV13-4455 BRO (AGRx) United States District Court, C.D. California, Western Division. November 24, 2015

FINAL ORDER AND JUDGMENT [UNOPPOSED]

BEVERLY REID O'CONNELL, District Judge.

Plaintiff Pavel Djukich has filed a Motion for Order Granting Final Approval of Class Action Settlement and Entering Judgment ("Motion"). Defendant Carwell, LLC ("Carwell") does not object.

On November 9, 2015, the Court held a Final Fairness Hearing regarding the proposed Settlement that is the subject of this Motion. The Court has reviewed the papers submitted in this Action, including the Settlement Agreement and General Release (including Exhibits 1-5 thereto) (collectively, "Settlement Agreement"), the motions and memoranda submitted by Plaintiff and Defendant ("Parties"), and the arguments made at the Final Fairness Hearing. On November 12, 2015, The Court issued an Order Granting Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement, Docket Number 145.

Based on the Court's full review of the record, the Court finds good cause to grant the Motion and ADJUDGES, DECREES, and ORDERS as follows:

1. Defined Terms.

The Court adopts the defined terms set forth in the Settlement Agreement for purposes of this Final Order and Judgment (also "Order"), unless otherwise specified.

2. Settlement Agreement.

The Settlement Agreement is adequate, fair, and reasonable. The Parties adequately performed their obligations under the Settlement Agreement.

3. Notice.

Carwell provided notice to Class Members in compliance with the Settlement Agreement and pursuant to California state law and federal due process. The notice: (a) fully and accurately informed Class Members about the Action and the proposed Settlement; (b) provided sufficient information to enable Class Members to decide whether to accept the benefit offered, object to the proposed Settlement, or opt out and pursue their own remedies; (c) provided procedures for Class Members to file written objections to the proposed Settlement, appear at the Final Fairness Hearing, and to state objections to the proposed Settlement; and (d) provided the time, date, and place of the Final Fairness Hearing. In response to the Class notice, no Class Member requested to be excluded or filed and served objections to the Settlement.

4. Settlement Class.

The Settlement Class is defined as follows and includes all Class Members who did not timely and validly opt out:

All current and former employees technicians, service technicians, or mechanics employed by Carwell from April 29, 2009, to June 30, 2013, and who were paid on a Flat Rate Basis under the Challenged Pay Plan at any time during the aforementioned period.

Defined as "payment to technicians, service technicians, or mechanics based on specified repairs performed on vehicles, supplemented during any particular pay period by a tool allowance' if necessary to ensure compensation for such pay period at no less than double the then-applicable minimum wage of eight dollars and zero cents ($8.00)."

Defined as "the pay plan in effect as of April 29, 2009, that paid technicians, service technicians, and mechanics on a Flat Rate Basis and that is the subject of challenge in [ Djukich v. Carwell, LLC ]."

5. Binding Effect of Order.

This Order applies to all claims or causes of action so identified in the Settlement Agreement and binds all Class Members, none of whom timely and validly submitted a request for exclusion pursuant to this Court's Preliminary Approval Order.

6. Releases.

Through the Plaintiff Class Release, Plaintiffs and all Class Members (and Plaintiff Class Releasing Parties) are: (a) deemed to have released and discharged Carwell (and Defendant Released Parties) from all claims (Released Claims) arising out of or relating to any act, omission, or other conduct as provided under the Settlement Agreement; and (b) barred and permanently enjoined from asserting, instituting, or prosecuting, either directly or indirectly, such Released Claims. The full terms of the releases described herein are set forth in the Settlement Agreement.

7. Class Relief.

Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, within thirty (30) business days of the date of Final Judicial Approval, the Settlement Administrator shall send the Class Benefit to all Settlement Class Members.

8. Enhancement or Service Payment Award.

An Enhancement or Service Payment Award of $10,000 shall be awarded to the Class Representative. The Settlement Administrator shall pay said amount within twenty-five (25) business days of Final Judicial Approval.

9. Attorneys' Fees and Costs.

An award of $257,320.00 in Attorneys' Fees (28% of the Gross Settlement Fund), and $30,613.59 in Costs in shall be awarded to Class Counsel. The Settlement Administrator shall pay said amount within twenty-five (25) business days of Final Judicial Approval. Except as expressly provided herein, each Party will bear all of its own attorneys' fees and costs.

10. Settlement Administrator.

The Court further approves payment of the Settlement Administration Expenses of the Settlement Administrator, CPT Group, Inc., of $9,000.00 for services rendered and to be rendered in connection with the completion of its administrative duties pursuant to the Settlement Agreement.

11. Court's Jurisdiction.

The Court will retain jurisdiction over this Action and the Parties until final performance of the Settlement Agreement.

12. Final Judgment.

The Court hereby enters final judgment in this Action in accordance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the Preliminary Approval Order, this Order, and the Court's Order at Docket Number 145. This Action is dismissed with prejudice.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED.


Summaries of

Djukich v. Carwell, LLC

United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California, Western Division
Nov 24, 2015
CV13-4455 BRO (AGRx) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 24, 2015)
Case details for

Djukich v. Carwell, LLC

Case Details

Full title:PAVEL DJUKICH, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated…

Court:United States District Court, Ninth Circuit, California, C.D. California, Western Division

Date published: Nov 24, 2015

Citations

CV13-4455 BRO (AGRx) (C.D. Cal. Nov. 24, 2015)