Case 3:13-cv HSG Document 133 Filed 01/19/16 Page 1 of 5

Similar documents
Case3:13-cv SC Document99 Filed06/05/15 Page2 of 7 1 WHEREAS, Plaintiffs Arville Winans and Wilma Fritz in this action entitled Arville 2 Winans

Case5:10-cv RMW Document207 Filed03/11/14 Page1 of 7

Case 3:14-cv PGS-LHG Document 130 Filed 05/14/18 Page 1 of 9 PageID: 4283

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND PROVIDING FOR NOTICE

Case 3:13-cv HSG Document Filed 03/17/16 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Case 4:13-cv YGR Document 126 Filed 09/07/16 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 3:11-md DMS-RBB Document 108 Filed 12/18/12 Page 1 of 12

1,=-= := usns son~ 1,.!oocume?~t " LEl'TRONICALLY fl.led i!

Case3:11-cv EMC Document70 Filed03/06/14 Page1 of 43

Case 2:07-cv RAJ Document 87 Filed 03/27/2009 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

Plaintiff, Defendant. for Denbury Resources, Inc. ("Denbury" or "Defendant") shares pursuant to the merger of

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION

Case Case 1:10-cv AKH Document Document Filed 03/16/15 03/13/15 Page 11of9

Case: 1:15-cv Document #: 169 Filed: 12/01/17 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:2786

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION

Case 3:15-cv RBL Document 214 Filed 05/16/18 Page 1 of 8

Case 1:12-cv VEC Document 186 Filed 05/27/15 Page 1 of 11. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK x

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 3:14-cv SI Document 240 Filed 11/21/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF OREGON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

[QIJ$&J ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND

Case 7:13-cv NSR-LMS Document 132 Filed 11/01/17 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case 5:12-cv SOH Document 457 Filed 04/08/19 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: 12296

Case 2:17-cv GAM Document 56 Filed 03/23/18 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case 5:05-cv RMW Document 97 Filed 08/08/2007 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 1:11-cv LAK-JCF Document 285 Filed 01/30/15 Page 1 of 9

Case 4:10-cv YGR Document Filed 06/17/16 Page 8 of 156

IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLfEAS p H. D H lit ui Item 4u.i CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CLASS ACTION

Case 9:14-cv WPD Document 251 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/10/2017 Page 1 of 16 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 7:15-cv AT-LMS Document 129 Filed 05/04/18 Page 1 of 8

Case 2:14-cv MCE-KJN Document 87 Filed 07/08/16 Page 1 of 14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 1: 1 0-cv Document #: 77 Filed: 03/22/11 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:569

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 2:16-cv RSL Document 82 Filed 12/20/18 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

Currently before the Court for preliminary approval is a settlement (the

Case3:12-cv WHO Document276 Filed02/14/14 Page1 of 13 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA.

Case 2:14-cv RJS Document 67 Filed 11/03/16 Page 1 of 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH

ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT, DIRECTING NOTICE, AND SCHEDULING FINAL APPROVAL HEARING

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OFPENNSVLVAJ'ELA ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING SETTLEMENT AND PROVIDING FOR NOTICE

Case 2:14-cv JCC Document 98 Filed 11/24/15 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE

Case 1:12-cv RM-KMT Document 239 Filed 03/06/17 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Case 1:14-cv RNS Document 191 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/29/2017 Page 1 of 5. United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

Case 4:10-cv YGR Document Filed 06/17/16 Page 1 of 11

Case 1:10-cv ER-SRF Document 844 Filed 11/19/18 Page 1 of 11 PageID #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. Plaintiff, j Judge: Hon. Joan M. Lewis ) ) )

Case 1:09-cv SAS Document 59-1 Filed 06/28/11 Page 1 of 9 EXHIBIT A

Case 1:13-cv WHP Document 571 Filed 06/02/16 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 576 Filed: 07/06/17 Page 1 of 15 PageID #:22601

Case 8:11-cv JST-JPR Document Filed 08/16/13 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:5240

PLAINTIFF S EXHIBIT 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA. Richmond Division

Case 3:14-cv TJC-JBT Document 173 Filed 10/05/17 Page 1 of 11 PageID 6189

nm OPOREPJYINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IOC SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YOR. This matter came before the Court for hearing pursuant to this Court's Order Granting

[PROPOSED] FINAL APPROVAL ORDER

Case 2:08-cv SHM-dkv Document 327 Filed 06/23/14 Page 1 of 23 PageID 8969

Case3:10-cv SI Document135 Filed07/11/12 Page1 of 6

Case 3:15-cv VAB Document 46 Filed 05/20/16 Page 1 of 52


Case 3:09-cv JPG-PMF Document 47 Filed 01/11/11 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #466

Case 2:11-cv CMR Document 30 Filed 05/07/12 Page 1 of 7

Case 1:15-cv WHP Document 148 Filed 06/28/18 Page 1 of 14

Case 1:12-cv JSR Document 63 Filed 11/12/14 Page 1 of 13

Case 1:15-cv CCC Document 101 Filed 08/22/17 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Case: 1:12-cv Document #: 117 Filed: 08/12/14 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:706

Case 7:16-cv KMK Document 75 Filed 10/17/17 Page 1 of 11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA CHARLOTTE DIVISION 3:18-cv RJC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Judge:

I ELECTRONICALLY FILED

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

Case 4:14-md CW Document 615 Filed 03/29/17 Page 1 of 9

BEFORE THE AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION

Case 0:13-cv JIC Document 318 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/30/2016 Page 1 of 11 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Case 1:09-cv PAC Document 159 Filed 07/13/15 Page 1 of 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ) ) ) ) ) )

Case 3:17-cv EMC Document 49 Filed 08/26/18 Page 1 of 15

Case4:13-cv YGR Document104 Filed05/12/15 Page1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

Case: 1:15-cv Document #: 127 Filed: 03/06/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:2172

AGREED MOTION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION

Plaintiffs, Defendants. Plaintiffs, Defendants.

Case 4:15-cv JSW Document 98 Filed 04/25/18 Page 1 of 11

the terms and conditions of the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement with Certain Defendant s

Case 1:04-cv DAB Document 569 Filed 12/02/10 Page 1 of 8 SOUTHERN DISTIUCT OF NEW YORK..

1:1_ (I f 0 HiIiB} ORDER PRELIMINARILY APPROVING PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AND PROVIDING FOR NOTICE

Case: 1:08-cv Document #: 679 Filed: 02/16/17 Page 1 of 12 PageID #:29342

FINALLY CERTIFYING A CLASS

Case 2:06-cv R-CW Document 437 Filed 10/12/12 Page 1 of 11 Page ID #:7705

Case 4:16-cv CW Document 75-4 Filed 08/14/18 Page 1 of 7

Case 1:16-cv AJN Document 420 Filed 05/22/18 Page 1 of 6. Case 1:16-cv AJN Document Filed 11/13/17 Page 1 of 6

FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Case 1:17-cv AT Document 77 Filed 09/14/18 Page 1 of 12

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 1:15-cv JFK Document 114 Filed 11/05/18 Page 1 of 12 Case 1:15-cv JFK Document Filed 10/30/18 Page 2 of 13

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case: 1:17-cv Document #: 25 Filed: 10/18/17 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:156 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

Transcription:

Case :-cv-0-hsg Document Filed 0// Page of 0 ARVILLE WINANS, by and through his guardian ad litem, RENEE MOULTON, on his own behalf and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION Plaintiff, EMERITUS CORPORATION and DOES through 00, inclusive Defendants. CASE NO.: :-cv-0-sc FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER APPROVING CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT Judge: Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam Courtroom: Case No. :-cv-0-sc

Case :-cv-0-hsg Document Filed 0// Page of 0 By order dated January,, Dkt No., this Court granted plaintiffs' motion for class action settlement approval and separate application for attorneys' fees, reimbursement of litigation costs and service awards to the named plaintiffs (herein "Final Approval Order". In accordance with the Final Approval Order and the parties' Stipulation of Settlement filed May,, Dkt. No., (herein "Stipulation", and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED THAT:. This Final Judgment and Order ("Judgment" incorporates by reference the definitions in the Stipulation, and all terms used herein shall have the same meanings as set forth in the Stipulation unless set forth differently herein. The terms of the Stipulation are fully incorporated in this judgment as if set forth fully here. As confirmed in the Final Approval Order, the parties have agreed that the Settlement Fund referenced in the Stipulation shall be increased to $. million.. The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and all Parties to the action, including all Settlement Class Members.. As set forth in the Final Approval Order, which is incorporated herein, the Court approves the settlement as set forth in the Stipulation, and finds that the settlement is in all respects fair, reasonable, adequate and just to the Settlement Class Members.. Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule (c, the Court certifies the following Settlement Class: Plaintiffs and all similarly situated persons who resided at one of the California assisted living facilities owned and/or operated by Defendants under the Emeritus name from July, 0 through May, (the Class Period, and who contracted with Emeritus for services for which Emeritus was paid money. Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (i those for whom the Settlement Administrator does not have a valid address; (ii Defendants and their officers, directors and employees; (iii any person who files a valid and timely Request for Exclusion; and (iv the Judges to whom this Action and the Other Actions are assigned and any members of their immediate families. Case No. :-cv-0-sc

Case :-cv-0-hsg Document Filed 0// Page of 0. Also excluded from the Settlement Class are all persons who submitted valid requests for exclusion who are listed on Exhibit A attached hereto. The persons listed in Exhibit A are not bound by this Judgment or the terms of the Stipulation.. Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule (c(, all such Persons who satisfy the Settlement Class definition above, except those Persons who timely and validly excluded themselves from the Settlement Class, are Settlement Class Members bound by this Judgment and the terms of the Stipulation.. Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule (a, the Court finds that the Plaintiffs Arville Winans, by and through his Guardian Ad Litem, Renee Moulton, and Ruby Richardson, as Trustee of the Wilma F. Fritz Trust are members of the Settlement Class, their claims are typical of the Settlement Class claims, and they fairly and adequately protected the interests of the Settlement Class throughout the proceedings in the Action. Accordingly, Arville Winans, by and through his Guardian Ad Litem, Renee Moulton, and Ruby Richardson, as Trustee of the Wilma F. Fritz Trust, are properly appointed as the Class Representatives.. The Settlement Class meets all requirements of Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule (a and (b( for certification of the class claims alleged in the operative complaint, including: (a numerosity; (b commonality; (c typicality; (d adequacy of the Class Representative and Class Counsel; (e predominance of common questions of fact and law; and (f superiority.. Having considered the factors set forth in Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule (g(, the Court finds that Class Counsel are properly appointed to represent the Settlement Class Members and they have fairly and adequately represented the Settlement Class for purposes of entering into and implementing the settlement. 0. The Stipulation and this Judgment are not admissions of liability or fault by Defendants or the Released Parties, or a finding of the validity of any claims in the Action or of any wrongdoing or violation of law by Defendants or the Released Parties. Neither this Judgment, nor any of its terms or provisions, nor any of the negotiations or proceedings connected with it, shall be offered as evidence or received in evidence in any pending or future civil, criminal, or Case No. :-cv-0-sc

Case :-cv-0-hsg Document Filed 0// Page of 0 administrative action or proceeding to establish any liability of, or admission by Defendants, the Released Parties, or any of them. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in this Judgment shall be interpreted to prohibit the use of this Judgment in a proceeding to consummate or enforce the Stipulation, the Final Approval Order, or this Judgment, or to defend against the assertion of Released Claims in any other proceeding, or as otherwise required by law.. Defendants are hereby ordered, and agree, to comply with the terms of the Stipulation of Settlement.. Upon the Effective Date, and subject to fulfillment of all of the terms of the Stipulation, each and every Releasing Party shall be permanently barred and enjoined from initiating, asserting and/or prosecuting any Released Claim against any Released Party in any court or any forum.. The Plaintiff and all Settlement Class Members shall, as of the Effective Date, conclusively be deemed to have acknowledged that the Released Claims may include claims, rights, demands, causes of action, liabilities, or suits that are not known or suspected to exist as of the Effective Date. The Plaintiff and all Settlement Class Members nonetheless release all such Released Claims against the Released Parties. Further, as of the Effective Date, the Plaintiff and all Settlement Class Members shall be deemed to have waived any and all protections, rights and benefits of California Civil Code section and any comparable statutory or common law provision of any other jurisdiction.. Upon the Effective Date, and subject to fulfillment of all of the terms of the Stipulation, the Court hereby dismisses with prejudice the Action, and all Released Claims against each and all Released Parties and without costs to any of the Parties as against the others. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this Order does not dismiss any claims that have been or may be asserted in the future by any persons or entities who have validly and timely requested exclusion from the Settlement Class.. Without affecting the finality of the Judgment, the Court reserves jurisdiction over the implementation, administration and enforcement of this Judgment, the Final Approval Order and the Stipulation, and all matters ancillary thereto. Case No. :-cv-0-sc

Case :-cv-0-hsg Document Filed 0// Page of 0. The Court finding that no reason exists for delay in ordering final judgment pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule (b, the clerk is hereby directed to enter the Judgment forthwith.. The Parties are hereby authorized without needing further approval from the Court, to agree to and adopt such modifications and expansions of the Stipulation, including without limitation, the forms to be used in the process of distributing settlement payments, which are consistent with this Judgment and do not limit the rights of Settlement Class Members under the Stipulation.. For the reasons set forth in the Final Approval Order, the objections to the Stipulation and approval of this settlement are expressly overruled.. All other relief not expressly granted to the Settlement Class Members is denied.. Within thirty (0 days after all Settlement Awards have been paid to all Settlement Class Members, Plaintiffs shall file a compliance report with the Court. The report shall include a declaration from the Settlement Administrator specifying the amounts remaining in the Reserve Fund, if any. Assuming any funds remain, Plaintiffs shall also file a request to confirm distribution of any such funds to the identified cy pres recipient, The Institute on Aging. IT IS SO ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED. DATED: // USW 0. Honorable Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. United States District Case No. :-cv-0-sc