Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-04230/USCOURTS-cand-3_07-cv-04230-2/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 710
Nature of Suit: Fair Labor Standards Act
Cause of Action: 29:201 Fair Labor Standards Act

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4659283.1

SCOTT EDWARD COLE (State Bar No. 160744)

MATTHEW R. BAINER (State Bar No. 220972)

CARRIE S. LIN (State Bar No. 241849)

SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC

1970 Broadway, Ninth Floor

Oakland, CA 94612

Telephone: (510) 891-9800

Facsimile: (510) 891-7030

E-mail: clin@scalow.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

SHERRY R. CARR, individually, and on behalf of all 

others similarly situated

MALCOLM A. HEINICKE (State Bar No. 194174)

TYLER ROOZEN (State Bar No. 248669)

MUNGER, TOLLES & OLSON LLP

560 Mission Street

Twenty-Seventh Floor

San Francisco, CA 94105

Telephone: (415) 512-4000

Facsimile: (415) 512-4001

E-mail: Malcolm.Heinicke@mto.com

Attorneys for Defendant

SHEA MORTGAGE INC.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SHERRY R. CARR individually, and on 

behalf of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiffs, vs.

SHEA MORTGAGE INC.,

Defendant.

CASE NO. C07-04230 BZ

SUPPLEMENTAL JOINT CASE 

MANAGEMENT STATEMENT AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Judge: Honorable Bernard Zimmerman

DATE: March 24, 2008

TIME: 4:00 p.m.

CTRM: G, 15th Floor

Case 3:07-cv-04230-BZ Document 21 Filed 03/19/08 Page 1 of 6
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4659283.1

- 1 - SUPPLEMENTAL JOINT CMC STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER - CASE NO. C07-04230 BZ

SUPPLEMENTAL CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT

The parties jointly submit this Supplemental Case Management Statement and 

Proposed Order pursuant to Local Civil Rule 16-9, which supplements the parties’ initial Case 

Management Statement filed on December 3, 2008. Following an all-day mediation with a highly respected mediator, counsel for the 

parties negotiated a settlement. Putative class counsel, an experienced law firm devoted to the 

type of wage and hour case at issue here, believes the settlement to be fair and reasonable and 

further believes that the absent class members should be given the opportunity to respond to it. Following this mediation, however, the original named Plaintiff and putative class representative

in this suit stated that she would not agree to the settlement In situations such as this one, federal 

courts routinely permit the substitution of the named plaintiff so that class counsel can proceed 

with the negotiated settlement and give all class members the opportunity to participate or opt out 

of the settlement as they desire. Putative class counsel has identified a suitable named plaintiff, 

and the parties here jointly request that the Court set a schedule that facilitates such substitution 

and the associated amendment of the complaint. This will allow the parties to proceed with the 

settlement and eventually present it to this court for preliminary approval and authorization to 

allow the absent class members to respond to the settlement themselves. I. CASE BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Sherry Carr (“Plaintiff”) commenced this action on August 17, 2007, in 

the Northern District of California, San Francisco Division. Defendant answered on October 2, 

2007. Plaintiff is a former Shea Mortgage Inc. (“Shea Mortgage”) Loan Counselor who brought

this putative class and collective action claiming that she and other Loan Counselors were 

misclassified as exempt employees, and, as a result, were denied overtime pay, wages for missed 

meal and rest breaks, and related penalties. The complaint seeks unpaid wages (including 

overtime compensation and interest thereon), meal and rest period compensation, waiting time 

penalties, and injunctive relief against Defendant. The class of individuals proposed in the 

complaint is relatively small -- specifically, the current and former Loan Counselors in California 

during the pertinent period number is approximately sixty. Defendant denies Plaintiff’s 

Case 3:07-cv-04230-BZ Document 21 Filed 03/19/08 Page 2 of 6
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4659283.1

- 2 - SUPPLEMENTAL JOINT CMC STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER - CASE NO. C07-04230 BZ

allegations and that this case is appropriate for class treatment. This Case Management Conference was originally scheduled for December 10, 

2007. However, on December 3, 2007, the parties filed a stipulation requesting that the CMC be 

continued pending a private mediation, scheduled for March 5, 2008 before David Rotman, Esq., a professional and highly regarded mediator specializing in wage and hour matters. The Court 

entered an Order continuing the Case Management Conference until March 24, 2008, at 4:00 p.m.

II. SUBSEQUENT CASE DEVELOPMENTS

A. Initial Disclosures and Discovery

Pursuant to the Court’s December 4, 2007, Case Management Order, the parties 

served their initial disclosures. Plaintiff made her initial disclosures on December 3, 2007. 

Defendant made its initial disclosures on December 17, 2007.

In advance of the parties’ private mediation, Shea Mortgage provided class 

counsel with information related to the class (class size, work weeks, job descriptions, average 

compensation). In addition, Representative Plaintiff Sherry R. Carr was deposed February 20, 

2008. Class counsel has also engaged in extensive informal discovery efforts, which included

conducting in-depth interviews with various putative class members and obtaining from them

numerous declarations and relevant documentation. B. Mediation

On March 5, 2008, the parties attended a mediation before Mr. Rotman. Prior to 

the mediation, putative class counsel consulted with Plaintiff Carr about the mediation. Plaintiff 

Carr did not personally attend. At the conclusion of the mediation, following an entire day of 

arms-length negotiation and the significant assistance of the mediator, Defendant Shea Mortgage 

and putative class counsel reached a tentative settlement agreement that class counsel believes to 

be fair, reasonable and in the best interests in the class. When presented with the settlement at the 

conclusion of the mediation, however, Plaintiff Sherry Carr stated her unwillingness to serve as 

class representative and accept the terms of the settlement . As a result, subsequent to the 

mediation, class counsel engaged in discussions with Tamara Partridge. Ms. Partridge had 

previously provided putative class counsel with a declaration and various documents pertinent to 

Case 3:07-cv-04230-BZ Document 21 Filed 03/19/08 Page 3 of 6
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4659283.1

- 3 - SUPPLEMENTAL JOINT CMC STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER - CASE NO. C07-04230 BZ

the case. Ms. Partridge has subsequently expressed her willingness and desire to act as class

representative and accept the terms of the settlement on behalf of the class. C. Procedural Issues to be Addressed

1. Substitution of Plaintiff

It is well established that when a named plaintiff is unwilling to accept a 

negotiated settlement that class counsel believes to be reasonable, the district court should allow 

class counsel to substitute in a new class plaintiff if there is one willing to serve and accept the 

settlement. See, e.g., Olden v. LaFarge Corp., 472 F.Supp.2d 922, 937-39 (E.D. Mich. 2007) 

(permitting class counsel, pursuant to Fed. R. of Civ. Proc. 23, to withdraw from representing 

named plaintiff and substitute in new class representative where original named plaintiff objected 

to settlement that counsel believed was fair and reasonable); Heit v. Van Ochten, 126 F.Supp.2d 

487, 494-95 (W.D. Mich. 2001) (same). In this case, putative class counsel seeks to make such a 

substitution, and putative class counsel notes that such a substitution will not have a prejudicial 

effect on the individual claims on Plaintiff Carr, who will remain free to opt out of the settlement 

if she so desires.The parties respectfully propose that their counsel be given a deadline to submit a 

stipulation effectuating such a substitution. Specifically, the parties respectfully submit that they 

could file such a stipulation within fourteen (14) days of the Case Management Conference, i.e., 

by April 7, 2008. (To the extent the Court feels it necessary to accomplish such a substitution 

through a formal motion, the parties respectfully propose that the Court schedule a hearing for 

such a motion in the near future.)

2. Amended Complaint

Following the substitution of the named plaintiff, putative class counsel anticipates 

filing an amended complaint substituting Tamara Partridge as the Class Representative in this 

action and adding an additional claim that class counsel and Ms. Partridge wish to assert 

following their further investigation into this matter. Defendant plans to stipulate to such an 

amendment consistent with the discussions the parties have had to date.

The parties respectfully propose that their counsel be given a deadline to submit a 

Case 3:07-cv-04230-BZ Document 21 Filed 03/19/08 Page 4 of 6
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4659283.1

- 4 - SUPPLEMENTAL JOINT CMC STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER - CASE NO. C07-04230 BZ

stipulation permitting the filing of an amended complaint along with the proposed amended 

complaint itself. Specifically, the parties respectfully submit that they could file such a 

stipulation within twenty-eight (28) days of the Case Management Conference, i.e., by April 21, 

2008, assuming the substitution of plaintiffs has been previously approved. (To the extent the 

Court feels it necessary to accomplish such an amendment through a formal motion, the parties 

respectfully propose that the Court schedule a hearing for such a motion.)

After the amended complaint is filed, the parties plan to submit a motion for 

preliminary approval of the class settlement. D. Trial Plan

The parties agree that, as the result of the tentative settlement agreement reached 

during the March 5, 2008 private mediation, it is unnecessary to set trial or pre-trial dates. DATED: March 17, 2008 SCOTT COLE AND ASSOCIATES, APC

By: /s/ Scott Cole_______________

SCOTT COLE

Attorneys for Plaintiff

SHERRY R. CARR 

DATED: March 17, 2008 MUNGER TOLLES AND OLSON LLP

By /s/ Malcolm A. Heinicke_______

MALCOLM A. HEINICKE

Attorneys for Plaintiff

SHEA MORTGAGE INC.

Case 3:07-cv-04230-BZ Document 21 Filed 03/19/08 Page 5 of 6
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

4659283.1

- 5 - SUPPLEMENTAL JOINT CMC STATEMENT AND [PROPOSED] ORDER - CASE NO. C07-04230 BZ

[PROPOSED] CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER

The Case Management Statement and [Proposed] Order is hereby adopted by the Court as 

the Case Management Order for the case and the parties are ordered to comply with this Order. 

The parties will file a stipulation and motion regarding putative class counsel’s withdrawal as 

Counsel for Sherry R. Carr and substitution of Tamara Partridge as Class Representative by April 

7, 2008. The parties will stipulate to Amending the Complaint to substitute Tamara Partridge as 

Class Representative, and Plaintiff Partridge through putative class counsel will file a first 

amended complaint by April 21, 2008. Dated: March , 2008 By: _________________________________ Hon. Bernard Zimmerman,

United States Magistrate Judge

19

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Bernard Zimmerman

Case Management Conference 

is continued to May 12, 2008 

at 4:00 p.m.

Case 3:07-cv-04230-BZ Document 21 Filed 03/19/08 Page 6 of 6