Caleb Landis, Individually and on Behalf of Others Similarly Situated v. DJGN Lexington, LLC, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky preliminarily approves a proposed class and collective action settlement involving alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and state wage-and-hour laws. The court preliminarily certifies settlement classes, appoints the named plaintiffs and class counsel, approves proposed notice procedures, and schedules further proceedings for final approval. The settlement provides for a $750,000 common fund for class payments, attorneys’ fees and costs, administration expenses, and service awards.

Holdings

1. The proposed Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana settlement classes were likely to satisfy Rule 23(a)'s numerosity, commonality, typicality, adequacy, and ascertainability requirements.
2. The proposed classes were likely to satisfy Rule 23(b)(3)'s predominance and superiority requirements.
3. The proposed settlement was preliminarily approved because it was likely to be found fair, reasonable, and adequate under Rule 23(e)(2) and applicable Sixth Circuit settlement factors.
4. The proposed one-third common-fund attorney-fee award, estimated costs, and $5,000 service awards for each named plaintiff were preliminarily approved as reasonable.
5. The proposed notice plan was approved because it provided practicable individual notice and the plaintiffs showed a strong likelihood that potential FLSA opt-in plaintiffs were similarly situated.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the proposed Kentucky, Ohio, and Indiana classes were likely to satisfy Rule 23(a) and Rule 23(b)(3) for settlement purposes.
2. Whether the proposed settlement was likely to be found fair, reasonable, and adequate under Rule 23(e)(2).
3. Whether the proposed class representatives and class counsel were adequate for settlement purposes.
4. Whether the proposed notice plan satisfied Rule 23(e) and Rule 23(c)(2)(B).
5. Whether the plaintiffs showed a strong likelihood that potential FLSA opt-in plaintiffs were similarly situated so that court-facilitated notice was appropriate under 29 U.S.C. § 216(b).

Disposition

other