Notices

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS
COUNTY DEPARTMENT, CHANCERY DIVISION

PENELOPE BAIM BLOCK,   BRIJ M. SHARMA, CHARANJIT            

SINGH, LISA M. BERTINI,   VANDANA MAKKER, BALA M.                  

KRISHNA, TY C. GERHARDT,  JEFFREY ZIMMERMAN,                                

MUKESH MITTAL, SANJAY  AGARWAL, and SAVITA REDDY,           

             Plaintiffs,                                  

                  v.                                                                   01 CH 9137

McDONALD’S CORPORATION,                                        Judge Richard Siebel

           Defendant.                               

[PROPOSED] SETTLEMENT ORDER AND JUDGMENT

Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the Plaintiff Settlement Class, having filed a motion for an order preliminarily approving the Settlement Agreement (“Motion”); defendant McDonald's Corporation (“McDonald's”) having joined in that Motion; the said Motion having come on regularly for hearing before the above-entitled Court; the Court having entered its Preliminary Approval Order on March 29, 2002; the Court having conducted a hearing regarding final approval of the Settlement Agreement (“Settlement”) on June __, 2002 at ______, at which it considered any objections filed with or presented to the Court and the parties’ responses thereto; the Court being fully advised in the premises and good cause appearing therefor, the Court enters its order granting final approval of the Settlement, and finds and orders as follows:

1.         The Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action and all parties to this action, including all members of the Plaintiff Settlement Class as defined in paragraph 1.10 of the Settlement.

2.         The Settlement previously filed in this action and the terms set forth therein are found and determined to be fair, reasonable, and adequate, and are hereby approved and ordered performed by all parties.

3.         The Court has determined that the notice given to the Plaintiff Settlement Class fully and accurately informed the Plaintiff Settlement Class of all material elements of the proposed settlement and constituted the best practicable notice to all members of the Plaintiff Settlement Class.

4.         Immediately upon entry of this Settlement Order and Judgment, the Second Amended Complaint herein shall be dismissed with prejudice, which dismissal shall be without costs to any party, except as specifically provided in the Settlement.

5.         This Settlement Order and Judgment applies to all claims or causes of action settled under the terms of the Settlement, and shall be fully binding with respect to all members of the Plaintiff Settlement Class who did not properly request exclusion.  The persons who filed timely and valid requests for exclusion from the Plaintiff Settlement Class and who are therefore not bound by this Settlement Order and Judgment are set forth in Exhibit 1 attached hereto.

6.         This Settlement Order and Judgment is a final judgment within the meaning and for purposes of Illinois Supreme Court Rule 304(a), as well as any law of the United States or any state or territory of the United States, or principle of common law, which is similar, comparable, or equivalent to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 304(a), and is the Settlement Order and Judgment provided for in paragraph 14.1 of the Settlement.

7.         The Court adjudges that the Representative Plaintiffs and all members of the Plaintiff Settlement Class who did not properly request exclusion are barred and permanently enjoined from asserting, instituting, or prosecuting, either directly or indirectly, any claims settled under the terms of the Settlement, which they had, have, or may have in the future, to the extent provided in the Settlement.

8.         Without affecting the finality of this Settlement Order and Judgment in any way, the Court retains jurisdiction over:  (1) the implementation and enforcement of the Settlement; (2) any other action necessary to conclude this settlement and to implement the Settlement; and (3) the construction and interpretation of the Settlement.

9.         This Settlement Order and Judgment does not constitute an expression by the Court of:  (1) any opinion, position or determination as to the merit or lack of merit of any of the claims and/or defenses of McDonald's, the Representative Plaintiffs, or the Plaintiff Settlement Class, or (2) the propriety of certification of the Plaintiff Settlement Class.  Neither this Settlement Order and Judgment, nor the Settlement, nor the fact of settlement, nor the settlement proceedings, nor settlement negotiations, nor any related document, shall be used as an admission of any fault or omission by McDonald's or be offered or received in evidence as an admission, concession, presumption, or inference against McDonald's for any purpose whatsoever other than in such proceedings as may be necessary to consummate or enforce the Settlement.

10.       The Court finds that no just reason exists for delay in enforcement or appeal of this Settlement Order and Judgment.   Accordingly, the Clerk is hereby directed forthwith to enter this Settlement Order and Judgment pursuant to Illinois Supreme Court Rule 304(a).

            Counsel for plaintiffs are awarded costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees in the amount of $_____, to be paid in addition to and apart from the Settlement Amount created under the terms of the Settlement.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

601983 v01.SF (CWHR01!.DOC)
5/6/02 2:36 PM (21160.0022)