United States District Court, D. Colorado
ALANNAH BLANKS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff,
v.
MACHOL & JOHANNES, LLC, Defendant.
ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF CLASS ACTION,
GRANTING UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES, COSTS, AND
SERVICE AWARD, AND DISMISSING CASE WITH PREJUDICE
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
This
matter is before the Court on Plaintiff Alannah Blanks'
Unopposed Motion for Final Approval of Class Action
Settlement and for Attorney's Fees, Costs, and Payment of
Service Award for the Class Representative (Doc. # 40) and
the parties' Joint Motion for Entry of Final Approval of
Class Action Settlement (Doc. # 44). For the reasons set
forth in Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion and during the
Court's hearing on May 29, 2019, see (Doc. 43),
the Court finds that the terms of the settlement are fair,
reasonable, and adequate. Therefore, the Court ORDERS:
1.
Settlement Classes: Pursuant to Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3), the Court certifies two classes
(the “Settlement Classes, ” composed of
“Class Members”):
a. The “FCRA Settlement Class” includes all
Colorado consumers who have had their TransUnion consumer
reports/credit scores published in various judicial court
actions by Defendant within two years of the date of the
filing of this action; and
b. The “FDCPA Settlement Class” includes all
Colorado consumers who have had their TransUnion consumer
reports/credit scores published in various judicial court
actions by Defendant within one year of the date of the
filing of this action.
2.
Class Representative and Class Counsel: The
Court finally certifies Plaintiff Alannah Blanks as the Class
Representative and Thomas L. Lyons, Jr. as Class Counsel.
3.
Notices: The form and method for notifying
the Class Members of the settlement and its terms and
conditions was in conformity with this Court's Order
Granting Joint Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class
Action Settlement (Doc. # 37) and satisfied the requirements
of Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(c)(2)(B) and due process and constituted
the best notice practicable under the circumstances. The
Court finds that the proposed notices were clearly designed
to advise the Class Members of their rights.
4.
Settlement Approval: The Court finds that the
settlement of the lawsuit, on the terms and conditions set
forth in the Settlement Agreement (Doc. # 34-1), is in all
respects fundamentally fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the
best interest of the Class Members, especially in light of
the benefits to the Class Members; the strength of the
Plaintiff's case; the complexity, expense, and probable
duration of further litigation; the risk and delay inherent
in possible appeals; and, the limited amount of any potential
total recovery for the class.
a. The settlement reflected in the Settlement Agreement
(id.) is APPROVED and made an Order of this Court.
b. The Settlement Administrator is HEREBY AUTHORIZED to
distribute settlement payments to Class Members in accordance
with the Settlement Agreement.
c. This Order is binding on all Class Members, except the
individual who requested exclusion from the Settlement
Classes.
d. The Settlement Agreement and this Order are not and shall
not be construed as an admission by Defendant of any
liability or wrongdoing in this or in any other proceeding.
5.
Release of Claims: The Class Representative,
the Class Members, and their successors and assigns are
permanently barred and enjoined from instituting or
prosecuting, either individually or as a class, or in any
other capacity, any of the Released Claims against any of the
Released Parties, as set forth in the Agreement. The Released
Claims are compromised, settled, released, discharged, and
dismissed with prejudice by virtue of these proceedings and
this Order.
6.Service Award for Class Representative: The
Court APPROVES a service award of $5, 000.00 to the Class
...