Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
2Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Declaration in Support of Preliminary Approval in Class Action Against 8x8 for California Wage and Hour Laws

Declaration in Support of Preliminary Approval in Class Action Against 8x8 for California Wage and Hour Laws

Ratings: (0)|Views: 642 |Likes:
Published by bamlawca
Declaration in Support of Preliminary Approval in Class Action Against 8x8 for California Wage and Hour Laws
Declaration in Support of Preliminary Approval in Class Action Against 8x8 for California Wage and Hour Laws

More info:

Published by: bamlawca on Apr 11, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

08/04/2011

pdf

text

original

 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
DECLARATION OF KYLE R. NORDREHAUG IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OFCLASS SETTLEMENT
-1-
BLUMENTHAL, NORDREHAUG & BHOWMIK
 Norman B. Blumenthal (State Bar #068687)Kyle R. Nordrehaug (State Bar #205975)Aparajit Bhowmik (State Bar #248066)2255 Calle ClaraLa Jolla, CA 92037Telephone: (858)551-1223Facsimile: (858) 551-1232
UNITED EMPLOYEES LAW GROUP
Walter Haines (State Bar #71705)65 Pine Ave, #312Long Beach, CA 90802Telephone: (562) 256-1047Facsimile: (562) 256-1006Attorneys for Plaintiffs
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIAIN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
NIKKI MEIERDIERCKS, an individual;KARIN FLAVETTA, an individual; FRANKTORRES, an individual; on behalf of themselves, and on behalf of all personssimilarly situated,Plaintiffs,vs.8X8, INC.; and Does 1 to 10,Defendants.CASE No.
110cv162413
(Class Action)DECLARATION OF KYLE R.NORDREHAUG IN SUPPORT OFMOTION FOR PRELIMINARYAPPROVAL OF CLASS SETTLEMENTDate: April 29, 2011Time: 9:00 a.m.Dept.:1Judge:Hon. James P. Kleinberg[Complaint Filed: January 27, 2010]
E-FILED
Apr 8, 2011 8:00 AM
David H. Yamasaki
Chief Executive Officer/ClerkSuperior Court of CA, County of Santa ClaraCase #1-10-CV-162413 Filing #G-30947By D. Kontorovsky, Deputy
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728 
1
Capitalized terms have the same meaning as contained in the Agreement.
DECLARATION OF KYLE R. NORDREHAUG IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OFCLASS SETTLEMENT
-2-I, KYLE R. NORDREHAUG, declare as follows:1.I am a partner in the law firm of Blumenthal, Nordrehaug & Bhowmik counsel of record for the Plaintiffs and the putative Class in this matter. As such, I am fully familiar with thefacts, pleadings and history of this matter. The following facts are within my own personalknowledge, and if called as a witness, I could testify competently to the matters stated herein.2.This declaration is being submitted in support of plaintiff’s Motion For an Order(1) Preliminarily Approving Settlement of Plaintiffs’ Claims; (2) Scheduling Final FairnessHearing; and, (3) Directing that Notice be sent to Class Members. Assuming the Court signs thePreliminary Approval Order on April 29, 2011, Plaintiffs suggest that the Final Fairness Hearing beset for a date that is 130 days out, which would mean September 9, 2011 or as soon thereafter as theCourt is available. Lodged herewith as Exhibit 1 is a copy of the Stipulation and SettlementAgreement (“Agreement”) along with exhibits thereto.
1
Fairness of Settlement3.Plaintiffs have agreed to a class Settlement with Defendant 8x8, Inc. (“Defendant”).As consideration for this Settlement, the Settlement Total that Defendant will pay under thisSettlement is a total of Six Hundred Twenty-five Thousand Dollars ($625,000). This payment willsettle all issues pending in the litigation between the Plaintiffs, on the one hand, and the Defendant,on the other hand, including but not limited to, all payments to the Settlement Class, attorney’s fees,litigation expenses, Service Payments to the Plaintiffs, the PAGA payment, and the expenses of theClaims Administrator. All of the Settlement Total will be disbursed pursuant to this Agreement,and no funds will revert to Defendant.4.The relief provided in the settlement will benefit all members of the Settlement Classequally. The settlement does not grant preferential treatment to Plaintiffs or segments of theSettlement Class in any way. All Settlement Class Members will receive the same opportunity toparticipate in and receive payment. Payments to the Settlement Class are all determined under the
E-FILED: Apr 8, 2011 8:00 AM, Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, Case #1-10-CV-162413 Filing #G-30947
 
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728
DECLARATION OF KYLE R. NORDREHAUG IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OFCLASS SETTLEMENT
-3-same methodology and are based upon each employees workweeks during the Class Period. TheSettlement Share for each Claimant will be calculated by (a) dividing the Net Settlement Total bythe total number of work weeks in a covered position during the Class Period for all Class Membersand (b) multiplying the result by each individual Claimant’s work weeks in a covered positionduring the Class Period. (Agreement at §III(C)(1).)5.Settlement negotiations took place before David Rotman, one of the preeminentmediators of wage and hour class actions in California. In preparation for the mediation, Defendantprovided Class Counsel with all of the necessary data, including time records and payrollinformation for the members of the Class. Plaintiffs analyzed the data with the assistant of theirdamages expert, Desmond, Marcello & Amster ("DM&A"), prepared damage estimates, andsubmitted a mediation brief to Mr. Rotman. The all-day mediation session held on November 9,2010 was contentious and arm's length, and ultimately resulted in a mediator's settlement proposalwhich the parties accepted. Based on Defendant’s data and their own independent investigationand evaluation, Class Counsel is of the opinion that the settlement with Defendant for theconsideration and on the terms set forth in the Agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate and is inthe best interest of the class in light of all known facts and circumstances, including the risk of significant delay, defenses asserted by Defendant, the possibility that little or no monetary relief could be awarded at trial, and numerous potential appellate issues.6.In October 2010, the damage estimates to compensate for the amount due for theunpaid overtime was calculated by Desmond, Marcello & Amster ("DM&A"), Plaintiffs' damageexpert, based upon the time record and payroll information obtained from Defendant. For theemployees in the Settlement Class whose claims are at issue here, the compensation owed to themembers of the class for unpaid overtime equaled $947,328. Once estimates for meal break compensation, wage statement penalties, waiting time penalties and other statutory penalties areincluded, the total maximum damage estimates was $1.56 million. The settlement of $625,000.00represents at least 65% of the total unpaid overtime, and 40% of the maximum value of all claimsand penalties, assuming these amounts could be proven at trial. Clearly the goal of this litigation to
E-FILED: Apr 8, 2011 8:00 AM, Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, Case #1-10-CV-162413 Filing #G-30947

Activity (2)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->