Meek v. Skywest, Inc.

Background

Cody Meek, Jeremy Barnes, and Coryell Ross, the named plaintiffs, sought preliminary approval under Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for a proposed class-action settlement. SkyWest Airlines, Inc. and SkyWest, Inc. filed a statement of non-opposition.

The court had previously certified classes of people currently or formerly employed by the defendants as Frontline Employees. For settlement purposes, the parties proposed a class consisting of all people employed by the defendants, based in California, as non-exempt Frontline Employees at any time from February 27, 2013, through the date of the preliminary-approval order. The proposed exclusions included counsel and judges involved in the action and their families, the defendants and certain related entities and individuals, people who timely opted out, and their successors or assigns.

Preliminary Approval

Rule 23(e) requires the court to make a preliminary fairness finding before a class settlement may proceed toward final approval. The court stated that a settlement may be approved only if it is fair, reasonable, and adequate. It considered the proposed class representatives and counsel, the negotiations, the relief offered, the release, and the notice and opt-out procedures.

The court preliminarily approved the appointment of Meek, Barnes, and Ross as class representatives and Milberg Grossman Bryson Phillips Grossman, PLLC; Simmons Hanly Conroy LLC; and Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP as class counsel. It found that the settlement appeared to result from serious, informed, and noncollusive negotiations. It also found that the settlement appeared to provide sufficient relief to the class.

The proposed settlement amount was $4.195 million, with an expected average payment of between $1,320 and $2,150 per eligible settlement class member. Class members would not be required to file claim forms; the opinion states that checks would simply be mailed. The court found that the proposed release was appropriately limited to claims arising from the facts pleaded in the complaint. It found the proposed 45-day opt-out period sufficient but ordered a somewhat longer period under the schedule it set.

Notice and Administration

The court approved a publicly accessible settlement website, rather than the password-protected website previously proposed. It approved notice by United States mail, supplemented by email, text message, and voicemail or automated-call notice. It found that these methods together constituted the best practicable notice to individual class members under the circumstances.

The court appointed CPT Group as claims administrator. CPT Group was directed to administer notice and process claims consistent with the settlement agreement and under the parties’ supervision. The court approved the form and content of the notice packet, the proposed mailing and electronic-notice methods, and the settlement website. The parties could jointly make minor changes to the notices for accuracy, clarity, layout, and efficient presentation without further court approval.

Schedule and Effect of the Order

The court stayed other proceedings in the action pending the final approval hearing, except proceedings needed to carry out or enforce the settlement and the order. Class members could opt out by timely submitting a signed opt-out form. People who opted out would not receive a settlement award, would not be bound by the settlement, and would not have the right to object, appeal, or comment under the settlement terms described in the order.

The final approval hearing was scheduled for February 23, 2023, at 10:00 a.m. The hearing was to address whether the settlement should receive final approval as fair, reasonable, and adequate, as well as any requests for incentive awards, attorney’s fees, and litigation expenses. Judge James Donato granted preliminary approval and reserved final approval; this order did not grant final approval of the settlement.