UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Transcription

1 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #: MARLIN & SALTZMAN Stanley D. Saltzman (SBN Adam M. Tamburelli (SBN Agoura Road, Suite 210 Agoura Hills, California Telephone: ( Facsimile: ( ssaltzman@marlinsaltzman.com Paul T. Cullen (SBN THE CULLEN LAW FIRM, APC Rinaldi Street, Box 647 Porter Ranch, CA / fax paul@cullenlegal.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA -- WESTERN DIVISION GERARDO ORTEGA and MICHAEL D. PATTON, individually and on behalf of themselves, all others similarly situated, and the general public, vs. Plaintiffs, J. B. HUNT TRANSPORT, INC., an Arkansas corporation; and DOES 1 to 10, inclusive, Defendants. CASE NO. 2:07-CV RGK-SH CLASS ACTION (FRCP 23 DECLARATION OF MARCUS J. BRADLEY IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES, COSTS AND INCENTIVE AWARDS DECLARATION OF MARCUS J. BRADLEY PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES, COSTS AND INCENTIVE AWARDS 1

2 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 2 of 6 Page ID #: DECLARATION OF MARCUS J. BRADLEY I, Marcus J. Bradley hereby declares as follows: 1. I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice law before all of the courts of the State of California, and most of the district courts within the Ninth Circuit. I am a partner in the law firm of Bradley/Grombacher LLP and formerly a partner at Marlin & Saltzman, LLP and Schwartz, Daniels & Bradley. In my capacity as counsel I have been actively involved with all aspects of this litigation. Accordingly, I have personal knowledge of all the matters set forth herein, and if called, I could and would competently testify to the following: 2. I, along with Stanley Saltzman and Paul Cullen, have worked closely on behalf of the class. 3. The litigation history is described more fully in the Declarations of Stanley Saltzman and Paul Cullen and will not be restated here. Attorneys Fee Award 4. Based upon the terms of the Settlement, Plaintiffs Counsel may collectively apply to the Court for an award of attorneys fees up to $5,000, I have practiced law since In 2000, I joined Mazursky, Schwartz & Angelo as an associate and became a partner in January 2005 at which time the firm was renamed Schwartz, Daniels & Bradley. I remained as a partner until the dissolution of the firm effective December 31, In January 2009, I became a partner with the law firm of Marlin & Saltzman. On September 1, 2016, I formed Bradley/Grombacher LLP. I personally, have been appointed as lead counsel or colead counsel on numerous occasions, and we litigate vigorously on behalf of the classes that we represent. A further view of our firm can be had at our firm website, at DECLARATION OF MARCUS J. BRADLEY PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES, COSTS AND INCENTIVE AWARDS 2

3 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 3 of 6 Page ID #: I have been responsible for all facets of class action employment and other complex litigation, from pre-filing investigation through trial and appeal. Since approximately May 2000, I have spent most of my time representing workers in wage and hour matters. I have litigated these issues in class actions to favorable statewide settlements that have recouped over $750,000, in unpaid wages, including the following: a. Guttierez v. State Farm Mutual, Los Angeles Superior Court (BC Class action mis-classification case seeking overtime compensation for approximately 2,600 insurance claims adjusters employed by State Farm. The Class was certified and summary adjudication was granted as to liability in favor of the Class. The case settled for $135 million just prior to trial, with Final Approval granted and no objections filed. A fee of 33.3% of the fund was awarded by the Honorable Anthony Mohr. b. Bednar v. Allstate Insurance Company, Los Angeles Superior Court (BC Class action mis-classification case seeking overtime compensation for approximately 1,200 insurance claims adjusters employed by Allstate. The Class was certified and summary adjudication was granted as to liability in favor of the Class. The case settled for $120 million just prior to trial, with Final Approval granted and no objections filed. A fee of 33.3% of the fund was awarded. c. Roberts v. Coast National Insurance, Orange County Superior Court (01CC Class action mis-classification case seeking overtime compensation for insurance claims adjusters employed by Coast National Insurance. Certification granted, and then the matter was tried to a binding arbitrator. Case settled during the arbitration for in excess of $18 million. A fee of 33.3% of the fund was awarded by the Hon. Steven Sunvold (Ret.. d. CNA Class Action Litigation, Los Angeles Superior Court Class (JCCP Class action mis-classification case seeking overtime compensation for DECLARATION OF MARCUS J. BRADLEY PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES, COSTS AND INCENTIVE AWARDS 3

4 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 4 of 6 Page ID #: insurance claims adjusters employed by Defendant. Case settled for $33 million, with Final Approval granted and no objections filed. A fee of 33.3% of the fund was awarded by the Hon. Victoria Cheney. e. Dotson v. Royal SunAlliance, Orange County Superior Court (02CC Class action mis-classification case seeking overtime compensation for insurance claims adjusters employed by Royal SunAlliance. Case settled for $12.3 million, with Final Approval granted and no objections filed. A fee of 33.3% of the fund was awarded. f. Parris v. Lowe's Home Improvement, venued in the Los Angeles Superior Court. Class action seeking payment of "off the clock" hours worked by all hourly8 employees of Lowe's in the State of California. Class was certified by the Court of Appeal and remanded for further proceedings. A $29.5 million settlement was approved without objection, with a fee of 33.3% of the fund awarded by the Honor Aurelio N. Munoz (Ret.. g. Pardo v. Toyota Motor Sales, et al. Los Angeles Superior Court (BC Class action mis-classification of workers with claims for overtime and missed meal and rest breaks. The case only covered a period of 1.5 years, as the defendants had re-classified back in The case settled for $7.75 million with a fee of 28% awarded. h. Smith/Ballard v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Wage and hour class action seeking unpaid vacation and personal time, unpaid wages, and related penalties on behalf of over 245,000 employees. The action was certified and settled for $86 million, while Defendants appeal of the certification was pending in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. i. Hoyng v. AON, venued in the Los Angeles Superior Court (BC Wage and hour litigation seeking overtime and related compensation for mis- DECLARATION OF MARCUS J. BRADLEY PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES, COSTS AND INCENTIVE AWARDS 4

5 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 5 of 6 Page ID #: classification on behalf of Relationship and Account Specialists. The case settled for $10.5 million with a 33.3% fee awarded by the Hon. Carolyn Kuhl. j. In RE Bank of America Wage and Hour Employment Practices Litigation, MDL 2138, United States District Court for the District of Kansas. California state and FLSA wage and hour litigation for various violations including unpaid overtime and off-the-clock work. Settled for $73 million with a 28% fee awarded. k. H & R Block Litigation, United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Class certified, and settlement reached prior to trial Total settlement of $35 million. 7. All of the counsel played important roles in the handling of the litigation. All counsel cooperated fully whenever called upon, whether it related to discovery needs, distinct research projects that could be handled by them, or working with the particular representative plaintiff or class members. 8. I believe that at all times, we made good-faith efforts to reduce duplication of efforts between Plaintiffs attorneys. To this end, we also deleted a number of hours actually worked from our lodestar calculations, which hours we considered not to be necessary to the effective litigation of this case. 9. Based on a review of the time previously incurred in the case, and by the time this case is fully administered, I will have spent more than hours on this matter. It should be noted that the hours reflects time I incurred since I left Marlin & Saltzman in Any time I incurred on this matter prior to leaving Marlin & Saltzman is captured in the time submitted by Marlin & Saltzman. 10. Based on my 24 years of experience my billing rate is $750. Using a rate of $750, the lodestar amount I have devoted to this case is $185, Detailed billing is attached as Exhibit A to this declaration. DECLARATION OF MARCUS J. BRADLEY PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES, COSTS AND INCENTIVE AWARDS 5

6 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 6 of 6 Page ID #: In my 24 years practicing as an attorney in this state, I have handled hundreds if not thousands of cases, many of them on a contingency basis. The contingency fees we have charged to our clients have generally fallen within the range of 33.3% to 40% of the recovery achieved. Additionally, I am aware by virtue of these 24 years in the field, that such contingency fees are normal and customary in the field, and have been for the entire length of my career. Of course, since we are a contingent firm, in the cases where we do not achieve a recovery, which has unfortunately occurred including on cases we have taken all the way through trial and appeal, we then recover nothing, and are normally out of pocket on all of the expenses and costs advanced. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my personal knowledge. This declaration is executed this 28 th day of December, 2018, at Westlake Village, California /S/ MARCUS J. BRADLEY Marcus J. Bradley DECLARATION OF MARCUS J. BRADLEY PLAINTIFFS MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS FEES, COSTS AND INCENTIVE AWARDS 6

7 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 1 of 12 Page ID #:15264 In Support of Plaintiffs Motion for Attorneys Fees, Costs, and Incentive Awards

8 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 2 of 12 Page ID #:15265

9 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 3 of 12 Page ID #:15266

10 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 4 of 12 Page ID #:15267

11 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 5 of 12 Page ID #:15268

12 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 6 of 12 Page ID #:15269

13 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 7 of 12 Page ID #:15270

14 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 8 of 12 Page ID #:15271

15 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 9 of 12 Page ID #:15272

16 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 10 of 12 Page ID #:15273

17 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 11 of 12 Page ID #:15274

18 Case 2:07-cv RGK-AFM Document Filed 12/28/18 Page 12 of 12 Page ID #:15275