Keck v. City of Seattle

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE BRADLEY A. KECK, MICHAEL R. Case No. 2:18-CV-1146 JEPPESEN and HERBERT W. WILSON, ORDER GRANTING JOINT 11 Plaintiffs, MOTION FOR APPROVAL 12 v. OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT THE CITY OF SEATTLE, Defendant.

This matter comes before the Court on the parties’ “Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement Agreement.” Dkt. #38.

18 On August 4, 2018, plaintiffs filed a complaint against the City of Seattle (“the City”).

19 Dkt. #1. The parties participated in a mediation on July 22, 2019 and reached a settlement. Dkt.

20 #37; see Dkt. #38 at 2. On July 31, 2019, they filed a joint motion requesting the Court to issue an order approving their Settlement Agreement, which includes a waiver and release by plaintiffs of all claims against the City, as well as a confidentiality clause. Dkt. #38 at 3.

23 Pursuant to the Court’s order dated August 23, 2019, the parties made their Settlement Agreement available for in camera inspection and review. Dkt. #39.

This Court has previously held that the Court’s responsibility to review a proposed class action settlement to determine whether the settlement is “‘fundamentally fair, adequate, and reasonable’ … does not extend to the context of individual settlement agreements, where each plaintiff may be consulted individually so as to vindicate her particular interests.” Wilson v. Maxim Healthcare Servs., Inc., No. C14-789RSL, 2017 WL 2988289, at *1 (W.D. Wash. June 20, 2017) (quoting Staton v. Boeing Co., 327 F.3d 938, 959 (9th Cir. 2003)). However, the Court makes an exception here because the defendant is a government entity. The Court finds that the settlement is fair, adequate, and reasonable. Staton, 327 F.3d at 959. It is approved.

For the foregoing reasons, the parties’ joint motion is GRANTED.

DATED this 28th day of August, 2019.

10 A 11 Robert S. Lasnik 12 United States District Judge