History
  • No items yet
midpage
Andrews v. Blick Art Materials, LLC
1:17-cv-00767
| E.D.N.Y | Sep 13, 2017
|
Check Treatment
|
Docket
Case Information

*1 Case 1:17-cv-00767-JBW-RLM Document 32 Filed 09/13/17 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 353

n.d

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

VICTOR ANDREWS, on behalf of himself MEMORANDUM AND ORDER ON THE and all others similarly situated, PARTIES' PROPOSED ENTRY OF

JUDGMENT

Plaintiff,

17-CV-767 (cid:9) / - against -

"it wo BLICK ART MATERIALS, LLC, WOPICE U1 . 01 (cid:9) COURT E.O.W.Y Defendant. * SEP 132017 * E LY (cid:9)

JACK B. WEINSTEIN, Senior United States District Judge: (cid:9) The court has the parties' joint motion for entry of judgment based upon a proposed judgment settling the case. See ECF No. 31.

Because this is a putative class action and may affect many persons, as well as set important precedents, a hearing on fairness and reasonableness is ordered. See David Herr, Annotated Manual for Complex Litigation § 21.612, p. 505 (4th ed. 2013) ("[A]lthough Rule 23(e) no longer requires court approval of a settlement or voluntary dismissal of individual claims as long as the settlement does not bind the class. . . [u]se of the court's supervisory authority to police the conduct of proposed class actions under Rule 23(d) may be appropriate."); cf Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(e) (2003) (changing rule to only require court approval of settlements of claims of a certified class).

The hearing shall be held in Courtroom lOB South on October 5, 2017 at 10:30 a.m. The named plaintiff and a representative with knowledge for defendant shall be present with counsel.

The court is particularly interested in a number of aspects of the proposed settlement:

1 *2 Case 1:17-cv-00767-JBW-RLM Document 32 Filed 09/13/17 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 354

• Why will it take two years to go into effect? Is a shorter time period desirable or

possible? • How will the defendants' websites technically operate once they comply with the

"Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Level AA?" • The court would find useful a demonstration of the technology proposed to be

implemented (assuming there is no action by the Department of Justice or substantial changes in technology while the proposed changes are being implemented).

The court will not be in a position to determine the appropriateness of the "WCAG 2.0 Level AA Guidelines" until it understands them.

SO RDERED.

Jac/B. Weinstein Senior United States District Judge Date: September 11, 2017

Brooklyn, New York

Case Details

Case Name: Andrews v. Blick Art Materials, LLC
Court Name: District Court, E.D. New York
Date Published: Sep 13, 2017
Docket Number: 1:17-cv-00767
Court Abbreviation: E.D.N.Y
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.