Wells Fargo Bank NA’s $95 million settlement to resolve claims that it violated California wage-and-hour laws survived an objector’s Ninth Circuit challenge, after the appeals court rejected the argument that one of its prior orders in a related case barred the deal.
The Ninth Circuit had partially affirmed a district court judgment in favor of another class of plaintiffs, but stayed the determination of any additional damages pending the California Supreme Court’s decision in a separate lawsuit that it said could affect whether further damages were owed.
Wells Fargo and the plaintiffs subsequently entered into the $95 million settlement, and the district court approved the deal along with an award of $21 million in attorneys’ fees.
On appeal, objector Kirk E. Fyson argued that the district court violated the Ninth Circuit’s mandate when it approved the settlement while the California Supreme Court case was still pending.
But nothing in the Ninth Circuit’s prior order prohibited the parties from reaching, or the district court from approving, the global settlement or the fee award.
Fyson challenged the fairness of the deal, pointing to a “clear sailing” provision in the settlement agreement. But even if the district court overlooked the potentially problematic provision, any error was harmless, the Ninth Circuit said on Wednesday in the unpublished decision.
A clear sailing...
You are reading the second issue of the Disinformation Monitor. It is published on a monthly basis and provides an overview of developments on the disinformation scenes on NATO’s eastern frontier....