Midland Credit Management Inc. v. Alton

for the remaining three, leaving only those three, out of the Notices for 157 members, being undeliverable. Howard also explains that no member has submitted an objection, request for exclusion, or a dispute of the computation for hours and settlement allocation. She notes that the deadline for submitting any objection, exclusion request, or dispute had expired by the date of the declaration.

Howard also explains that the Net Settlement Amount is about $155,250, after subtracting the attorneys’ fees, costs, administration expenses, and the enhancement payments for the named Plaintiffs. This, she explains, results in an average payment to members of about $988.85 with the highest being about $2,770.64 and the lowest about $11.74. She also details the individual PAGA payments to PAGA employees, with the average being about $119.86, the highest about $182.86, and the lowest about $4.57.

The court finds that settlement notice has been completed according to the court’s order and no member has objected to the settlement, disputed the calculations, or sought to be excluded. There are no other outstanding issues, based on this court’s prior findings resolving all other issues for fairness and compliance with applicable authority. The court GRANTS the motion.

The prevailing party shall prepare and serve a proposed order consistent with this tentative ruling within five days of the date set for argument of this matter. Opposing party shall inform the preparing party of objections as to form, if any, or whether the form of order is approved, within five days of receipt of the proposed order. The preparing party shall submit the proposed order and any objections to the court in accordance with California Rules of Court, Rule 3.1312.

6. 24CV06214, Midland Credit Management Inc. v. Alton

This matter is on calendar for the motion of Defendant Elisha Alton (“Alton”) to vacate the entry of default entered on January 28, 2025, and the default judgment entered on February 4, 2025. This motion was initially heard on March 4, 2026. At that time, this court continued the hearing to allow Alton to provide proof of service demonstrating service of notice of the hearing.

On July 10, 2026, Alton filed a supplemental declaration and proof of service that supplemental declaration was served, prior to it being filed, on July 9. Proof of service for notice of the hearing remains defective. As noted in this court’s prior ruling, “Defendant filed proof of service for the moving papers but this was attached to the moving papers and shows service prior to filing and obtain a hearing date. Accordingly, there is no proof of service for anything showing notice of the hearing.”