2012-00126884-CU-OE

Anatoli Romanov vs. Westward Hospitality Management

Nature of Proceeding: Final Approval Hearing

Filed By: Greene, Andrew M.

Plaintiffs’ Application for Final Approval of Proposed Class Settlement is GRANTED.

In approving a class action settlement, the Court is to determine whether the
settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate, in light of all of the circumstances.
California v. Levi Strauss & Co. (1986) 41 Cal.3d 460, 471; Dunk v. Ford Motor Co.
(1996) 48 Cal.App.4th 1794, 1801. The trial court is vested with broad discretion in
approving class settlements. Rebney v. Wells Fargo Bank (1990) 220 Cal.App.3d
1117, 1138.

The settlement of a class action is presumed to be fair where (1) the settlement has
been reached through arm’s length bargaining, (2) investigation and discovery are
sufficient to allow counsel and the court to act intelligently, (3) counsel is experienced
in handling similar litigation and (4) the percentage of objectors is small. Dunk, supra,
48 Cal.App.4th at 1802; Newberg & Conte, Newberg on Class Actions (4th Ed., 2002)
§11.41 at p. 92-93. The Court’s inquiry must be limited to the extent necessary to
reach a reasoned judgment that the agreement is not product of fraud or overreaching
by or collusion between, the negotiating parties, and that the settlement, taken as a
whole, is fair, reasonable and adequate to all concerned. Dunk, supra, 48 Cal.App.4th
at 1801.

In this wage and hour class action, filed June 22, 2012, plaintiffs allege that defendants violated sections of California wage and hour laws in connection with their policies
regarding payment of hourly employees.

Plaintiffs have conducted discovery, reviewed Defendants’ production of thousands of
pages of documents and tens of thousands of employment data entries. Plaintiffs’
settlement negotiations were conducted after the parties had consulted with various
experts in the area and interviewed a number of witnesses with information relating to
the pertinent facts. (Salisbury Decl., para. 7.)

The attorneys for plaintiff and the Class have substantial experience in consumer class
action litigation and recommend this Settlement based upon that experience and their
extensive work on this and other similar cases. Salisbury Decl., para. 5. Counsel for
defendants is a large, well-respected, law firm with an abundance experience in
defending this type of litigation. The fact that qualified and well-informed counsel
endorse the Settlement as being reasonable and adequate favors this Court’s approval
of the Settlement. The opinion of experienced counsel supporting the settlement is
entitled to considerable weight. Reed v. General Motors Com. (5th Cir. 1983) 703 F.2d
170, 175.

The parties have arrived at a Stipulated Settlement following an all-day mediation with
Judge Sabraw (Ret.) on July 18, 2013.

The requirements for class certification are there must be questions of law or fact
common to the class that are substantially similar and predominate over the questions
affecting the individual members; the claims of the representatives must be typical of
the claims or defenses of the class; and the class representatives must be able to fairly
and adequately protect the interests of the class. Civil Code § 1781; Dunk, supra, 48
Cal.App.4th at 1806; Richmond, supra, 29 Cal.3d at 470.

The Settlement Class (of approximately 372 members) is defined as “each person
employed by Defendants or its affiliates in California during the Class Period (from
June 22, 2008 through Preliminary Approval) who earned or was paid a ‘Service
Charge’, including a banquet service charge, banquet tips, room service charge, or
restaurant service charges, and who earned and received one or more overtime
payment(s) during their employment”.

The Class is so large that joinder of each individual claim would have been
impracticable. Accordingly, the proposed Settlement Class easily satisfies the
ascertainability and numerosity requirements. In its Preliminary Approval Order, this
Court has already determined that common issues of law and fact predominate. The
named plaintiffs’ interests are representative of and not antagonistic to those of the
class. The Class clearly meets all of the criteria for class certification.

The Court-approved mail notice was sent via first class mail to the last known
addresses approximately 372 Class Members and several additional mailings followed
to those for whom addresses could be found. (Behring Decl. para. 8) Further, Class
Members have lodged no objections to the settlement and only one class member has
elected to be excluded from the Settlement. (Salisbury Decl., para. 2. Behring Decl.,
paras. l2, 13.)

The proposed Settlement Fund is in a total maximum amount to be paid by Westmont
of $385,000 (the “Settlement Fund”). The Settlement Fund shall cover the court- approved sums for the Settlement Payments to Class Members, Class Counsel’s
attorneys’ fees and costs, enhancement award to Named Plaintiff, the employer’s
share of applicable FICA and FUTA payroll taxes on Settlement Payments made to
Class Members, and claims administration fees and costs. No interest shall accrue on
the Settlement Fund from the present time until the last payment is made. The
expected net settlement fund of over $216,000 will be payable to the class members,
with an the average gross settlement payment made to Class Members of
approximately $584 in compensation for their prior labor.

The funds are to be allocated (1) for an award of attorneys’ fees compensating Class
Counsel for its representation of the Class in this matter in an amount of $128,333,
which the Court finds reasonable under both the lodestar and percentage approach,
(2) the entire amount actual litigation costs and expenses in the amount of $10,464.57
(Salisbury Decl. para. 19; Redmond Decl. para. 5.), (3) claims administration fees and
costs incurred by Simpluris, the Parties’ agreed-to claims administrator, in an amount
not to exceed Twenty-Five Thousand Dollars ($25,000), (4) and an Enhancement
Award to the named plaintiff in an amount not to exceed Five Thousand Dollars
($5,000). These amounts, together with the employers’ share of FICA and FUTA
taxes, on Settlement Payments made to Class Members, are to be paid out of the
Settlement Fund.

The Court will sign the formal order provided.