Steinberg v. CoreLogic Credco, LLC
- Proceeding
- district
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- Marilyn L. Huff (author)
Analysis
The court reviewed unopposed motions for final approval of a class action settlement and for attorneys' fees, noting a proposed cy pres distribution of remaining funds. The court ordered the parties to file supplemental briefing on the cy pres distribution and continued the final approval hearing to March 25, 2024.
| What the court decided | The model |
|---|---|
Order directing parties to file supplemental briefing on the proposed cy pres distribution“The Court requests supplemental briefing that details how the proposed cy pres distributions are “guided by (1) the objectives of the underlying statute(s) and (2) the interests of the silent class members.”” | agree with court The court correctly identified that cy pres distributions in class actions must align with the statutory objectives and the interests of the class members. Citing Nachshin v. AOL, LLC, the court appropriately required the parties to demonstrate this alignment before final approval could be granted. This is a standard procedural step to ensure the settlement meets the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. |
Continuation of the final approval hearing“Additionally, the Court continues the final approval hearing from Monday, March 11, 2024, to Monday, March 25, 2024, at 10:30 a.m. Pacific Time.” | agree with court The court continued the hearing to allow time for the supplemental briefing on the cy pres issue. This is a reasonable exercise of the court's case management authority to ensure a fully informed decision on the final approval of the settlement. |
The order itself: sound — The order is a procedural directive to ensure compliance with Ninth Circuit precedent regarding cy pres distributions. It correctly cites the relevant binding authority (Nachshin) and sets clear deadlines for the supplemental briefing. The reasoning is sound and directly addresses the legal requirement for cy pres distributions in class settlements.
Opinion
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 8 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 9
10 MARLENE STEINBERG, Case No.: 3:22-cv-00498-H-SBC 11 Plaintiff, ORDER DIRECTING PARTIES TO 12 v. FILE SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING 13 ON MOTION FOR FINAL CORELOGIC CREDCO, LLC, APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION 14 Defendant. SETTLEMENT AND CONTINUING 15 FINAL APPROVAL HEARING 16 [Doc. Nos. 54, 55.] 17 18 19 On December 15, 2023, Plaintiff Marlene Steinberg (“Plaintiff”) filed unopposed 20 motions for final approval of class action settlement and for attorneys’ fees, costs, and class 21 representative service award. (Doc. Nos. 54, 55.) A final approval hearing is currently 22 scheduled for Monday, March 11, 2024, at 10:30 a.m. Pacific Time. (Doc. No. 56.) 23 In the motion for final approval of class action settlement, Plaintiff represent that 24 any “remaining [settlement] funds will be donated to the Homeownership Preservation 25 Foundation and Habitat for Humanity.” (Doc. No. 55 at 10.) The Court requests 26 supplemental briefing that details how the proposed cy pres distributions are “guided by 27 (1) the objectives of the underlying statute(s) and (2) the interests of the silent class 28 members.” See Nachshin v. AOL, LLC, 663 F.3d 1034, 1039 (9th Cir. 2011) (citing Six 1 || Mexican Workers v. Arizona Citrus Growers, 904 F.2d 1301, 1307 (9th Cir. 1990)). The 2 || parties must file a supplemental brief that is no more than ten (10) pages on this issue by 3 ||Monday, March 4, 2024. Any response in opposition must be filed by Monday, 4 ||March 11, 2024, and may not exceed five (5) pages. Absent further order of the Court, no 5 ||reply briefing may be filed. Additionally, the Court continues the final approval hearing 6 || from Monday, March 11, 2024, to Monday, March 25, 2024, at 10:30 a.m. Pacific Time. 7 IT IS SO ORDERED. 8 || DATED: February 15, 2024 | | lil | | | 9 MARILYN ®. HUFF, Distri ge 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 1] 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28