Summary
This document is a federal district court final approval order and judgment approving a class action settlement concerning certain Acura vehicles and claims relating to the HFL System. The court certified a settlement class, approved the settlement, dismissed the claims with prejudice, incorporated the release, awarded attorneys’ fees and expenses, and granted incentive awards to the named plaintiffs. The order retains jurisdiction to administer and enforce the settlement.
Holdings
- The settlement was fair, reasonable, and adequate and was finally approved.
- The requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and (b)(3) were satisfied for certification of the class for settlement purposes.
- The court had subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2), personal jurisdiction over the plaintiffs, defendant, and settlement class members, and jurisdiction to approve the settlement and enter judgment.
- The court awarded Class Counsel $8,555,519.50 in attorneys' fees, $1,026,270.91 in costs and expenses, and $5,000 to each named plaintiff as an incentive award.
- All claims against American Honda Motor Co., Inc. were dismissed on the merits and with prejudice, subject to the settlement's provisions concerning fees, costs, releases, and administration.
Questions Presented
- Whether the proposed class settlement was fair, reasonable, and adequate under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(2).
- Whether the requirements for certification of a settlement class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and (b)(3) were satisfied.
- Whether the court had subject matter and personal jurisdiction to approve the settlement and bind the settlement class members.
- Whether the requested attorneys' fees, expense reimbursement, and named-plaintiff incentive awards should be approved.
- Whether the claims against American Honda Motor Co., Inc. should be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to the settlement.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (3)
- In re Bluetooth Headset Prod. Liab. Litig., 654 F.3d 935, 946 (9th Cir. 2011)(followed)
- Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts, 472 U.S. 797, 811-12 (1985)(followed)
- Mullane v. Cent. Hanover Bank & Trust Co., 339 U.S. 306, 314-15 (1950)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…