Othart Dairy Farms, LLC et al v. Dairy Farmers Of America, Inc. et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
OTHART DAIRY FARMS, LLC, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v. No. 2:22-cv-00251-SMD-DLM
DAIRY FARMERS OF AMERICA, INC., et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING PROPOSED FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDED DISPOSITIONS
This matter is before the Court on the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition
(Doc. 224) recommending the Court grant Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion and Memorandum in
Support of Motion for Payment of Attorneys’ Fees, Reimbursement of Litigation Expenses,
Establishment of a Future Expense Fund, and Class Representative Service Awards (Doc. 220);
and on the Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition (Doc. 225) recommending the Court
grant Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion and Memorandum in Support of Motion for Final Approval
of the Settlements with Dairy Farmers of America, Inc. and Select Milk Producers, Inc. (Doc. 221)
(the “PFRDs”). The PFRDs notified the parties of their ability to file objections within 14 days
and that failure to do so waives appellate review. See Doc. 224 at 10; Doc. 225 at 6. The parties
filed a Joint Notice of Non-Objection to Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition on
November 12, 2025. Doc. 226.
The Court finds and orders as follows:
1. The Court adopts all findings and affirmations in the PFRDs as well as all
definitions contained in the DFA Settlement Agreement (see Doc. 205, Ex. 1) and Select Settlement
Case 2:22-cv-00251-SMD-DLM Document 228 Filed 12/08/25 Page 1 of 5

2
Agreement (see Doc. 205, Ex. 2) (collectively, the “Settlement Agreements”). See Doc. 224;
Doc. 225.
2. The Court finds that the requested attorneys’ fees in an amount not to exceed
$11,575,098.10, which represents 33 1/3 % of the DFA and Select Settlements, plus interest, is fair
and reasonable and should be granted. See Doc. 224 at 1–7, 10.
3. The Court finds that the expenses and costs incurred by Class Counsel have been
reasonable and typical of large, complex class actions and grants the request for reimbursement of
$211,780.03. See id. at 7–8, 10.
4. The Court grants the requested establishment of a $15,000 fund from the Gross
Settlement Fund to cover anticipated future expenses and directs Counsel to provide an accounting
of all such funds when they submit a motion for approval of a plan of distribution to the class. See
id. at 8, 10.
5. The Court grants the requested $100,000 service awards to each of the three named
representative groups: (1) Jordan Pareo; (2) Othart Dairy Farms, LLC; and (3) Desertland Dairy,
LLC, Del Oro Dairy, LLC, Bright Star Dairy LLC, and Sunset Dairy, LLC. See id. at 8–10.
6. The Court finds that it has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and
each of the parties to the Settlement Agreements, including all members of the Settlement Class,
DFA, Greater Southwest Agency, and Select. See Doc. 225 at 1.
7. The Court appoints Lockridge Grindal Nauen PLLP, Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro
LLP, and Scott + Scott LLP as Co-Lead Counsel for the Settlement Class, pursuant to Federal Rule
of Civil Procedure 23(g). Id. at 2. The Court further appoints the following class representatives
for the Settlement Class: (1) Pareo Farm, Inc. and Pareo Farm II, Inc., represented by Jordan Pareo;
(2) Othart Dairy Farms, LLC, represented by Maurice and Laurent Othart; and (3) Desertland
Case 2:22-cv-00251-SMD-DLM Document 228 Filed 12/08/25 Page 2 of 5

3
Dairy, LLC, Del Oro Dairy, LLC, Bright Star Dairy LLC, and Sunset Dairy, LLC, represented by
Ed DeRuyter. See id.
8. The Court affirms that the following Settlement Class has been certified solely for
the purposes of the Settlements:
All dairy farmers, whether individuals or entities, who produced Grade A milk and sold
Grade A milk independently or directly or through an agent to Defendants, DFA and Select,
within DFA’s Southwest Area region, composed of all of New Mexico, most of Texas
(except the far eastern part of that state), the eastern portion of Arizona, the Oklahoma
panhandle, and southwestern Kansas, from January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2025.
See id. (citing Doc. 212 ¶ 4). The Court excludes from the Settlement Class the individuals and
entities outlined in the PFRD. See id.
9. The Court hereby dismisses with prejudice all claims in the Plaintiffs’ action against
all Defendants, with each party to bear its own costs and fees, including attorneys’ fees, except as
provided in the Settlement Agreements and Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion and Memorandum in
Support of Motion for Payment of Attorneys’ Fees, Reimbursement of Litigation Expenses,
Establishment of a Future Expense Fund, and Class Representative Service Awards. See id. at 3
(citing Doc. 220).
10. The releases set forth in Paragraphs 16, 17, and 30 of the DFA Settlement
Agreement, and 15, 16, and 29 of the Select Settlement Agreement, are incorporated herein and
the Releasing Parties shall, by operation of law, be deemed to have released DFA, Select, and
Greater Southwest Agency from the Released Claims. All entities that are Releasing Parties or
that purport to assert claims on behalf of the Releasing Parties are hereby and forever barred and
enjoined from initiating, asserting, maintaining, or prosecuting any and all Released Claims against
the DFA Released Parties and Select Released Parties.
Case 2:22-cv-00251-SMD-DLM Document 228 Filed 12/08/25 Page 3 of 5

4
11. The DFA Released Parties and Select Released Parties are hereby and forever
released and discharged with respect to any and all claims or causes of action which the Releasing
Parties had, have, or in the future may have, arising out of or related to any of the Released Claims
as defined in the Settlement Agreements.
12. The Court notes that no objections to the Settlement Agreements or to Plaintiffs’
Unopposed Motion and Memorandum in Support of Motion for Payment of Attorneys’ Fees,
Reimbursement of Litigation Expenses, Establishment of a Future Expense Fund, and Class
Representative Service Awards have been filed. See Doc. 225 at 4. Any member of the Settlement
Class who failed to timely and validly request to be excluded from the Settlement Class shall be
subject to and bound by the provisions of the Settlement Agreements, the Released Claims
contained therein, and this Order with respect to all Released Claims, regardless of whether such
members of the Settlement Class seek or obtain any distribution from the Settlement proceeds. As
no member of the Settlement Class submitted a timely or valid request to be excluded from the
Settlement Class, all members of the Settlement Class are so bound.
13. The Court hereby retains continuing, exclusive jurisdiction over:
(a) consummation, administration, and implementation of the Settlement Agreements and any
allocation or distribution to Settlement Class members pursuant to further orders from this Court;
(b) disposition of the Settlement proceeds; (c) hearing and determining applications by Co-Lead
Counsel for attorneys’ fees, costs, expenses, and interest; (d) the actions in this litigation until this
Final Judgment has become effective and each and every act agreed to be performed by the parties
all have been performed pursuant to the Settlement Agreements; (e) hearing and ruling on any
matters relating to any plan of allocation or distribution of proceeds from the Settlements; (f) the
parties to the Settlement Agreements for the purpose of enforcing and administering the Settlement
Case 2:22-cv-00251-SMD-DLM Document 228 Filed 12/08/25 Page 4 of 5

5
Agreements and the releases contemplated by, or executed in connection with, the Settlement
Agreements; (g) the enforcement of this Final Judgment; and (h) any suit, action, proceeding, or
dispute arising out of or relating to the Settlement Agreements or the applicability of the Settlement
Agreements that cannot be resolved by negotiation and agreement.
14. The Court finds, pursuant to Rules 54(a) and (b) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure, that judgment should be entered and further finds that there is no just reason for delay
in the entry of Final Judgment as to the parties to the Settlement Agreements. Accordingly, the
Court enters this Order and Final Judgment.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
________________________________
SARAH M. DAVENPORT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 2:22-cv-00251-SMD-DLM Document 228 Filed 12/08/25 Page 5 of 5