Buford v. Medical Solutions, L.L.C.

Background

Laura Buford brought this class and representative action against Medical Solutions, L.L.C., and others identified in the complaint as Doe defendants. The court considered two unopposed motions: Buford’s motion for final approval of the class and representative action settlement, and her motion for attorney’s fees and costs.

The settlement covered the claims of the settlement class and claims under California’s Private Attorneys General Act, commonly called PAGA. The court found that notice had been mailed to class members as required, constituted the best notice practicable under the circumstances, and satisfied due process. The California Labor and Workforce Development Agency had also been notified as required by California Labor Code section 2699(l)(2). No class member or the agency objected to the settlement, the requested fees and costs, or the representative enhancement.

Rulings

The court found that the settlement resulted from good-faith, arm’s-length negotiations between experienced counsel, with assistance from a mediator. After considering the defendant’s potential exposure, the likelihood of success, the risks and costs of continued litigation, the complexity and delay of further proceedings, and the class’s response, the court found the settlement fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the class’s best interests. It also found that the PAGA settlement was meaningful and furthered PAGA’s purposes. The court therefore granted final approval of the Settlement and ordered the parties to perform their obligations under the settlement agreement.

The court granted Buford a $7,500 enhancement payment as class representative. It also approved $25,000 for CPT, Inc., the settlement administrator, and approved $157,500 for the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency as its share of PAGA civil penalties.

The court granted the motion for attorney’s fees and costs. It approved attorney’s fees of $287,500, representing 25% of the total settlement fund, and litigation costs of $11,881.82. The court found that class counsel’s work, the results obtained, the risks and skill involved, the contingent nature of the representation, the timing of the settlement, and comparable awards supported the request.

Release, Opt-Outs, and Continuing Jurisdiction

To the extent provided in the settlement agreement, participating class members were conclusively deemed to have released the released parties from claims based on the factual allegations asserted in the action. Kayla Smith and Janon Ashcraft timely and validly opted out, so they were excluded from the class and were not bound by the settlement agreement or the order.

The order also released the released parties from the PAGA civil-penalty claims alleged, or that could have been alleged, in this action based on the factual allegations in the operative complaint. The order stated that the releases did not affect claims alleged in Dittman v. Medical Solutions, L.L.C., et al., Eastern District of California Case No. 2:17-cv-01851-MCE-CKD.

The court retained jurisdiction to implement and enforce the settlement agreement, conclude the settlement, and resolve issues involving its enforcement, construction, and interpretation. The plaintiffs were ordered to submit a proposed judgment within five court days.

Effect of the Order

The order expressly stated that neither it nor the settlement agreement was an admission or concession of fault, liability, wrongdoing, or any other misconduct. It also stated that final settlement approval did not constitute the court’s opinion or determination on the merits of any party’s claims or defenses.