Legal Opinion
Allen v. Similasan Corp.
District Court, S.D. California
Decided August 9, 2016No. Case No. 12-cv-376-BAS-JLBPublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER:(1) DENYING JOINT MOTION FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT (ECF No. 216), AND(2) DENYING AS MOOT MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS’ FEES (ECF No. 211)
Hon. Cynthia Bashant, United States District Judge
Plaintiffs and Defendant Similasan have filed a Joint Motion for Final Approval of Settlement Agreement [ECF No. 216] and Plaintiffs have filed a Motion, unopposed by Similasan, for attorneys’ fees, costs and incentive awards. [ECF No. 211.] Because the Court determines ultimately that the proposed settlement agreement is not fair, adequate or reasonable for unnamed class members, the Court…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1998
- Staton v. Boeing Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- In Re Bluetooth Headset Products LiabilityCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2011
- 29 Fair empl.prac.cas. 1473, 30 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 33,064 the Officers for Justice, and Jesse J. Byrd v. The Civil Service Commission of the City and County of San Francisco, United States of America v. The City and County of San FranciscoCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1982
- Daniel Greenberg v. Procter & Gamble CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2013
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hawkins v. The Kroger CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. California · 2021