Quatinetz v. Optio Solutions LLC

Background

Paul Quatinetz brought this lawsuit individually and on behalf of a proposed class against Eco Shield Pest Control New York City, LLC, and Optio Solutions LLC. The parties agreed to settle, subject to notice to class members and the court’s final review. The opinion defines the proposed class as individuals with a New York address from whom the defendants attempted to collect, or asserted a right to collect, an additional collection fee beyond an amount Eco Shield claimed the person owed, during the period from September 16, 2016, through September 16, 2019.

The defendants identified 472 potential class members. The order does not state the total settlement fund, but it provides that each settlement class member would receive $46.95 if the settlement received final approval. The defendants would separately pay reasonable notice and administration costs.

Preliminary approval and administration

The court preliminarily found that the settlement appeared fundamentally fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the best interests of the class. In making that preliminary assessment, the court considered the benefits to class members; the complexity, expense, and likely duration of continued litigation; the stage of the case and discovery; the risks of proving liability and damages; the risks of maintaining the class through trial; the possible recovery; and Class Counsel’s views.

The court appointed Paul Quatinetz as class representative and Ryan Gentile and Shimshon Wexler as Class Counsel. It appointed Phoenix Class Action Administration Solutions as the settlement administrator and approved the proposed written notice as satisfying Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(c)(2)(B) and due process. The administrator was directed to mail notice no later than April 14, 2021.

Class members seeking exclusion had to send a signed written request to the settlement administrator postmarked by June 7, 2021. Class members wishing to object also had to file and serve a written objection by June 7, 2021, following the order’s specified requirements. A timely objector could appear at the final approval hearing, personally or through counsel, to address the settlement and any request for attorneys’ fees and costs. An objection that also requested exclusion would be treated as an exclusion request.

Final approval hearing and other provisions

The court scheduled the final approval hearing for July 16, 2021, at 3:30 p.m. The hearing was set to address whether the action satisfied the requirements for class treatment for settlement purposes, whether the settlement was fundamentally fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the class members’ best interests, and whether a final order and judgment should be entered dismissing the lawsuit with prejudice and releasing the claims covered by the settlement.

The order did not enter final judgment or finally approve the settlement. It also provided that the settlement agreement and the order would become void if specified material conditions were not satisfied, if the court rejected a material settlement component, or if approval were reversed on appeal and the reversal became final, after the parties had attempted in good faith to preserve the settlement. If voided, the parties’ rights and defenses would be restored without prejudice as though the settlement and order had not been executed or entered. The court retained continuing and exclusive jurisdiction over matters connected with administering and enforcing the settlement.

Disposition

The court entered an order preliminarily approving the proposed class settlement, approving the notice procedures, appointing the class representative, class counsel, and settlement administrator, and setting deadlines and a final approval hearing. Final approval and any dismissal with prejudice remained for later consideration.