Hughes, et al v. The United States of America

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII
PATRICK FEINDT, JR., ET AL.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.
______________________________
JACLYN HUGHES, ET AL.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Defendant.
______________________________
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Civil No. 22-00397 LEK-KJM
FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT
PLAINTIFFS’ SIXTH MOTION
FOR APPROVAL OF
SETTLEMENT OF FEINDT AND
HUGHES MINORS’ CLAIMS (ECF
NO. 811)
Civil No. 24-00059 LEK-KJM
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION TO GRANT
PLAINTIFFS’ SIXTH MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT
OF FEINDT AND HUGHES MINORS’ CLAIMS (ECF NO. 811)
On July 1, 2026, Plaintiffs filed a Sixth Motion for Approval of Settlement
of Feindt and Hughes Minors’ Claims (“Motion”). ECF No. 811.1 On July 15,
2026, Defendant United States of America (“Defendant”) filed a Response to the
1 The Court cites to the Feindt docket, unless otherwise noted.
Case 1:24-cv-00059-LEK-KJM Document 425 Filed 07/15/26 Page 1 of 4
PageID.<pageID>

2
Motion. ECF No. 840. The Court did not permit Plaintiffs to file a reply. ECF
No. 814.
The Court elected to decide this matter without a hearing pursuant to Rule
7.1(c) of the Local Rules of Practice for the United States District Court for the
District of Hawaii. Id.
After carefully considering the parties’ submissions, applicable law, and the
record in this case, the Court FINDS AND RECOMMENDS that the district court
GRANT the Motion for the reasons set forth in the Court’s findings and
recommendation on the plaintiffs’ first motion for approval of the settlements of
the minors’ claims, which the district court adopted, as briefly summarized below.
ECF No. 720, 2026 WL 1069447 (D. Haw. Apr. 2, 2026), adopted by ECF No.
730, 2026 WL 1080359 (D. Haw. Apr. 20, 2026). The Court reiterates and
incorporates by reference the analysis contained in its prior findings and
recommendation. Id.
DISCUSSION
Plaintiffs filed the Motion seeking approval of the settlements for 111 minor
plaintiffs in the Hughes matter. In its Response to the Motion, Defendant states
that it supports and joins in the Motion. ECF No. 840 at 2, 9.
“District courts have a special duty, derived from Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 17(c), to safeguard the interests of litigants who are minors.” Robidoux
Case 1:24-cv-00059-LEK-KJM Document 425 Filed 07/15/26 Page 2 of 4
PageID.<pageID>

3
v. Rosengren, 638 F.3d 1177, 1181 (9th Cir. 2011). Rule 17(c) provides, in
relevant part, that a district court “must appoint a guardian ad litem—or issue
another appropriate order—to protect a minor or incompetent person who is
unrepresented in an action.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 17(c)(2).
The Ninth Circuit has stated that district courts should “focus[] on the
net recovery of the minor plaintiffs under the proposed agreement.” Robidoux,
638 F.3d at 1181. The gross settlement amounts range from $4,750 to $27,000.
ECF No. 811-1 at 3–6. The net settlement amounts range from $3,134.80 to
$19,466.97 and are calculated by each minor’s gross settlement amount less
expenses, 25% attorneys’ fees pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act, and
4.712% Hawaii general excise tax. Id. at 3–6, 12.
In light of the facts of this case, the minors’ specific claims, and recovery in
similar cases, the Court finds that the settlements for the 111 settling minor
plaintiffs are fair and reasonable. The Court thus recommends that the district
court approve the settlements pursuant to Rule 17(c). See Robidoux, 638 F.3d at
1182 (noting that the Court must determine if each settlement “is fair and
reasonable in light of the facts of the case, each minor’s claims, and typical
recovery by minor plaintiffs in similar cases” and that, “[i]f the net recovery of
each minor plaintiff under the proposed settlement is fair and reasonable, the
district court should approve the settlement as presented”).
Case 1:24-cv-00059-LEK-KJM Document 425 Filed 07/15/26 Page 3 of 4
PageID.<pageID>

4
CONCLUSION
Based on the foregoing, the Court FINDS that the settlements for the 111
settling minor plaintiffs are fair and reasonable. The Court thus RECOMMENDS
that the district court GRANT Plaintiffs’ Sixth Motion for Approval of Settlement
of Feindt and Hughes Minors’ Claims (ECF No. 811).
IT IS SO FOUND AND RECOMMENDED.
DATED: Honolulu, Hawaii, July 15, 2026.
Feindt v. United States, Civil No. 22-00397 LEK-KJM; Hughes v. United States, Civil No. 24-00059
LEK-KJM; Findings and Recommendation to Grant Plaintiffs’ Sixth Motion for Approval of Settlement
of Feindt and Hughes Minors’ Claims (ECF No. 811)
Kenneth J. Mansfield
United State$ Magistrate Judge
Case 1:24-cv-00059-LEK-KJM Document 425 Filed 07/15/26 Page 4 of 4
PageID.<pageID>