Abdul Nevarez v. Forty Niners Football Company, LLC

Background

Plaintiffs asked the court to give final approval to a class action settlement, approve service awards for three class representatives, and award attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses. The case concerned alleged barriers to equal access at Levi’s Stadium for people with mobility disabilities and their companions. The court had preliminarily approved the settlement on March 9, 2020, and held a final approval hearing on July 16, 2020.

Settlement and Class Certification

The court found that the parties followed the required notice procedures through mailed and emailed notices, notices at Levi’s Stadium and on defendants’ websites, and a settlement website, email address, and toll-free telephone number. It found that the notice and claims process satisfied applicable requirements and gave damages-class members a fair opportunity to submit claims.

The court finally certified three settlement classes:

- The Injunctive Relief Class: people with mobility disabilities who use wheelchairs, scooters, or other mobility aids and who were or would be denied equal access to Levi’s Stadium’s facilities, services, seating, parking, amenities, or privileges. - The Companion Injunctive Relief Class: companions of people with mobility disabilities who used or would use companion seating for public events at Levi’s Stadium. - The Damages Class: people with mobility disabilities who purchased, attempted to purchase, or had others purchase accessible seating and who were denied equal access at events controlled by the specified Forty Niners entities.

The court appointed Abdul Nevarez and Sebastian DeFrancesco as representatives of the Injunctive Relief Class, Priscilla Nevarez as representative of the Companion Injunctive Relief Class, and Abdul Nevarez as representative of the Damages Class. It also confirmed the appointment of the listed attorneys as class counsel.

Settlement Approval

The court granted final approval of the settlement and found it fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the best interests of the classes. The settlement provided injunctive relief addressing physical access and policy changes, as well as a non-reversionary $24 million damages fund. The opinion states that the settlement would remediate more than 2,600 barriers at the stadium, parking lots, and connecting pedestrian rights of way, and that the expected remediation cost was at least $12.2 million.

The court directed the parties and settlement administrator to carry out the settlement. Class members were bound by the order and released claims covered by the settlement, subject to the settlement’s opt-out provisions. Damages-class members who filed timely and valid opt-outs could not receive money from the damages fund and were not bound by the order concerning Unruh Act statutory minimum-damages claims against the Forty Niners defendants. The settlement and order were not admissions of liability or wrongdoing. The action was dismissed on the merits and with prejudice as to the released claims. The court retained continuing jurisdiction to supervise and enforce the settlement during its term and required a post-distribution accounting.

Service Awards

The court granted the motion for service awards. It approved $5,000 for each of Abdul Nevarez, Priscilla Nevarez, and Sebastian DeFrancesco, for a total of $15,000. The court found that the representatives had diligently performed their duties, including responding to discovery, preparing declarations, participating in depositions, assisting with factual investigation and settlement, and conducting class outreach.

Attorneys’ Fees, Costs, and Expenses

The court granted Class Counsel $1,199,148.87 in costs and out-of-pocket expenses and $12,258,003.53 in attorneys’ fees. The requested amounts were within the settlement agreement’s $13,457,152.40 cap.

The court adjusted the hourly rate for three staff attorneys from $625 to $240. This reduced the lodestar—the calculation based on reasonable hours multiplied by reasonable hourly rates—from $11,605,473 to $10,907,891.50. The court then approved a 1.124 multiplier, based in part on the risks, difficulty, skill required, work performed, public importance, and results obtained. The court concluded that the resulting fee award was reasonable.