Vaden v. Linn Star Transfer, Inc.
- Haywood Gilliam
- 4:19-cv-01846
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 2
In Vaden v. Linn Star Transfer, Judge Gilliam approved Alma Jackson’s $3,500 gross settlement, requiring payment of net proceeds and a stipulated dismissal.
The order directly affected Alma Jackson’s settlement proceeds and the parties’ obligation to complete the settlement and submit a stipulated dismissal. It also concerned Faye Vaden in her court-appointed representative role for Jackson, as well as the defendants Linn Star Transfer, Inc. and Haier US Appliance Solutions, Inc.
What happened
In Vaden v. Linn Star Transfer, Inc., Faye Vaden and Alma Jackson alleged that a gas dryer negligently manufactured and installed by the defendants caused a gas leak, respiratory problems, and medical expenses.
The court had appointed Vaden to act for Jackson in the case. After the parties reached a settlement, the court reviewed the proposed agreement and the parties’ statements at a hearing.
Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. ruled that the settlement was fair, reasonable, and in Jackson’s best interest. He approved Jackson’s $3,500 gross settlement, ordered her $1,733.45 net payment deposited within 30 days, and directed the parties to file a stipulated dismissal within 30 days or explain why they could not.
The detailed version
- Vaden v. Linn Star Transfer, Inc. · No. 4:19-cv-01846
- Haywood Gilliam
- Jan. 17, 2020
Background
Faye Vaden and Alma Jackson sued Linn Star Transfer, Inc. and Haier US Appliance Solutions, Inc. They alleged that the defendants negligently manufactured and installed a gas dryer, causing a gas leak in the plaintiffs’ home. The plaintiffs alleged that the leak caused respiratory problems and medical expenses.
The court previously appointed Vaden as Jackson’s guardian ad litem, meaning a person appointed to represent another person’s interests in the litigation, under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 17(c)(2). Because Jackson had a court-appointed representative, the court stated that it had to evaluate and approve any settlement involving her.
Settlement Review
After successful settlement negotiations, the plaintiffs filed an application for settlement approval. Counsel for all parties and the plaintiffs appeared at a hearing. Based on the case filings, the circumstances of the case, and counsel’s statements, the court found that the proposed settlement was sufficiently fair and reasonable and in Jackson’s best interest.
Ruling
The court granted the application for settlement approval as to Jackson in the amount of $3,500 gross, less the identified reasonable attorney fees and litigation costs. The court stated that the net settlement proceeds were $1,733.45 and directed that the money be made payable to Jackson and deposited in her bank account within 30 days of the order. The court also directed the parties to submit a stipulated dismissal within 30 days or show cause why they could not do so.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.