Caudle

Caudle v. Sprint/United Management Company

Good Law
United States District Court, Northern District of CaliforniaDecember 16, 20193:17-cv-06874California4,381 words

Opinion

Trial Court Opinion

INTRODUCTION

18 In this wage-and-hour class action, plaintiffs move for final approval of a proposed 19 settlement agreement and for attorney’s fees and expenses. Defendant does not oppose, but there 20 21 is one objection. For the reasons stated below, the objection is OVERRULED. To the extent stated 22 below, the motion for final approval of the class settlement is GRANTED. The motion for 23 attorney’s fees and expenses is GRANTED IN PART.

STATEMENT

24 Prior orders set forth the detailed background of this case (see Dkt. No. 45). In brief, 25 defendant Sprint/United Management Company sells mobile phone devices and services to retail 26 customers. In February 2016, Sprint instituted a redesigned incentive compensation plan called 27 the Sprint Promoter Score Adjustment program, which remained in effect until March 2017. 28 individually earned commission based on factors outside the individual employees’ control and unrelated to the individual employees’ efforts regarding a particular sale or transaction. Plaintiffs Joshua Caudle and Krystle White — a former store manager and former lead retail consultant, respectively — worked in various northern…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.