Practical Law Launches New What's Market Class Action Settlement Agreements Database | Practical Law

Practical Law Launches New What's Market Class Action Settlement Agreements Database | Practical Law

Summaries of class action settlement agreements are now available through Practical Law's What's Market. What's Market provides a continuously expanding database of summaries that helps counsel draft class action settlement agreements by analyzing and comparing recent court approved agreements, including comparing class definitions, types of relief and settlement amount, fees, objection and opt-out procedures and blow-up provisions.

Practical Law Launches New What's Market Class Action Settlement Agreements Database

Practical Law Legal Update w-000-4358 (Approx. 9 pages)

Practical Law Launches New What's Market Class Action Settlement Agreements Database

by Practical Law Litigation
Published on 30 Jun 2015USA (National/Federal)
Summaries of class action settlement agreements are now available through Practical Law's What's Market. What's Market provides a continuously expanding database of summaries that helps counsel draft class action settlement agreements by analyzing and comparing recent court approved agreements, including comparing class definitions, types of relief and settlement amount, fees, objection and opt-out procedures and blow-up provisions.
On July 9, 2015, technology giants Apple, Google and other Silicon Valley companies will seek final approval from the US District Court for the Northern District of California of a $415 million class action settlement. This high-profile class action lawsuit involves allegations that the late Apple CEO Steve Jobs, Google Chairman Eric Schmidt and other Silicon Valley executives secretly agreed not to poach each other's technical employees in violation of antitrust laws. Before granting preliminary approval of the current agreement, Judge Lucy H. Koh had previously rejected a proposed $324.5 million settlement finding that it did not adequately compensate the class. (See In re High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litig., No. 11-cv-2509.)
Although the Silicon Valley defendants have increased the settlement amount, it is still unclear whether the court will grant final approval. As a result of potential abuses with class action settlements, such as disproportionate attorneys' fees, incentive awards to class representatives and possible awards to cy pres beneficiaries, courts have been scrutinizing class action settlement agreements more closely in recent years (see for example, In re Baby Prods. Antitrust Litig., 708 F.3d 163, 173, 177-80 (3d Cir. 2013); Pearson v. NBTY, Inc., 772 F.3d 778, 781 (7th Cir. 2014); Allen v. Bedolla, No. 13-55106, , at *5 (9th Cir. June 2, 2015)).
Unlike individual actions, the court must approve a class action settlement to ensure that the proposed settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate (Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 23(e)). This is primarily to protect the interests of unnamed class members who are not present during settlement negotiations (Redman v. RadioShack Corp., 768 F.3d 622, 629 (7th Cir. 2014)). However, there are no clear-cut standards for determining whether a class action settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate, and various federal circuit courts apply differing analyses. For example, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit considers several factors, including the amount offered in settlement, the extent of discovery and the reaction of class members to the proposed settlement (Facebook, Inc., 696 F.3d 811, 819 (9th Cir. 2012) (citing Hanlon v. Chrysler Corp., 150 F. 3d 1011, 1026 (9th Cir. 1998)).
For help on drafting class action settlement agreements, Practical Law has launched its What's Market Class Action Settlement Agreements Database. The Class Action Settlement Agreements Database analyzes a sampling of court-approved class action settlement agreements covering a variety of claims across jurisdictions with a final approval date from January 1, 2013.
These summaries include case-specific information such as judge and counsel, as well as key agreement provisions such as class definition, type of relief and settlement amount, fees, objection and opt-out procedures and blow-up provisions. Subscribers can use the database to:
  • Search approved class action settlement agreements by judge, counsel, industry sector, claims and so on.
  • Filter approved agreements by jurisdiction, settlement amount, attorneys' fees and so on.
  • Access and print summaries, as well as the underlying agreement and final order associated with each case.
  • Select and compare summaries of approved class action settlement agreements side-by-side.
  • Download and print comparisons of approved class action settlement agreements as Word or Excel files.
For example, below is a comparison of two summaries that Practical Law analyzed in the What's Market Class Action Settlement Agreements Database.
Case Name
Fafard v. Apple Inc., et al.
Trinidad, et al. v. Pret A Manger (USA) Limited, et al.
Jurisdiction
Northern District of California
Southern District of New York
Docket number
4:12-cv-05125
1:12-cv-06094
Industry sector
Consumer goods
Food and beverage
Nature of case
Breach of contract and third party beneficiary, breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, conversion, violation of California's Unfair Competition Law and violation of California's Legal Remedies Act for cancelling prepaid gift cards before the value of the gift card was fully utilized and redeemed by the cardholder, without providing a refund to the purchaser or cardholder and for failing to honor such cancelled gift cards.
Violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law for failure to compensate for all hours worked, failure to pay overtime at the required rate, improper tip pooling and lack of adequate wage statements.
Nature of claim
Breach of contract
Labor and employment
Judge
Claudia Wilken
Paul A. Engelmayer
Legal counsel
Class counsel: 
Kershaw, Cutter & Ratinoff LLP
Marcus & Auerbach LLC
Defendants' counsel: 
Morrison & Foerster LLP
Reed Smith LLP
Class counsel and counsel for individuals who opted-in:
Lee Litigation Group, PLLC
Defendants' counsel:
Jones Day
Defendant(s)
Apple Inc. 
Best Buy Co., Inc.
Interactive Communications International, Inc.
Pret A Manger (USA) Limited (Pret) 
Pret 100 Church Street, Inc.
Pret 1020 Sixth Avenue, Inc.
Pret 11th And F Street DC, Inc.
Pret 1200 Avenue Of The Americas Inc.
Pret 122 East 42, Inc.
Pret 1350 Broadway, Inc.
Pret 1399 New York Avenue Inc.
Pret 1410 Broadway, Inc.
Pret 1432 K Street, Inc.
Pret 179 Broadway, Inc.
Pret 1825 Eye Street, Inc.
Pret 1828 L Street, Inc.
Pret 185 Franklin Street Inc.
Pret 2 Park Avenue, Inc.
Pret 201 Pearl, Inc.
Pret 24 West 23rd, Inc.
Pret 319 Broadway Inc.
Pret 342 7th, Inc.
Pret 350 Hudson, Inc.
Pret 389 Fifth, Inc.
Pret 425 Lex, Inc.
Pret 425 Madison Inc.
Pret 485 7th Avenue, Inc.
Pret 485 Lexington, Inc.
Pret 50 Broadway, Inc.
Pret 501 Boylston Street, Inc.
Pret 62 West 45th Inc.
Pret 655 Sixth Avenue Inc.
Pret 708 Third Avenue Inc.
Pret 75 Nassau, Inc.
Pret 757 Third Inc.
Pret 821 Broadway, Inc.
Pret 825 Eighth Avenue Inc.
Pret 853 Broadway, Inc.
Pret 857 Broadway, Inc.
Pret 880 Third Avenue, Inc.
Pret A Manger-237 Park Avenue, Inc.
Settling defendant(s)
All
All
Settlement class(es)
Defined as:
All residents in the United States who currently have iTunes gift cards that were: (i) purchased from Best Buy stores between September 1, 2007 and December 31, 2009, (ii) deactivated between August 1 and October 31, 2010 and (iii) not redeemed by the cardholder.
Excluded from the settlement class are: (i) persons who validly and timely excluded themselves from the settlement class, (ii) persons who have settled with and released defendants from individual claims substantially similar to those alleged in this matter, (iii) the officers, directors and employees of any entity which is or has been a defendant, members of the immediate families of the foregoing and their legal representatives, heirs, successors and assigns and (iv) the officers, directors and employees of any defendant, or parent, subsidiary or affiliate of any of the defendants or any business entity in which any of the defendants owns a controlling interest, together with those individuals' immediate family members, as well as counsel for defendants and their immediate family members.
Defined as:
All current and former employees of Pret who worked for Pret in New York in a covered position (as a team member, team member star, barista, team member trainer, kitchen team leader, shop team leader, team leader or any other non-exempt non-management store position) at any time from August 9, 2006 to the date of entry of the order granting preliminary approval (March 28, 2014).
Settlement Administrator
Kurtzman Carson Consultants LLC
American Legal Claim Services
Procedural stage
Post-mediation
After mediation and significant formal and informal discovery, including document discovery, depositions and interviews.
Date operative complaint filed
October 3, 2012
December 27, 2012
Date settlement agreement filed
February 25, 2014
March 12, 2014
Date of preliminary approval
April 17, 2014
March 28, 2014
Date of final approval
June 12, 2014
September 29, 2014
Settlement amount
No cash settlement awarded to class members and the total monetary value is not specified, but is estimated to have a pre-redemption value of $6,218,295.
$910,000
Class representative award
$5,000
$7,500 (to one of the named plaintiffs) and $5,000 each (to the other four named plaintiffs).
Attorneys' fees/costs awarded
Attorneys' fees and additional costs: $750,000 (The court combined the amount of attorneys' fees and costs.)
Attorneys' fees: $209,246
Additional costs/expenses: $10,514.06
Attorneys' fees calculation method
Lodestar
Percentage (The court's analysis included a lodestar cross-check.)
Injunctive relief 
No
No
Non-monetary relief other than injunctive relief
Yes, settlement awards were in the form of reactivated gift cards, which will never expire or replacement cards.
No
Settlement administrator fees
Not specified, but all such fees to be paid by defendants.
$35,000 (maximum amount to be awarded).
Class certified for settlement only
Yes
Yes
Distribution to the settlement class
Relief to class members provided through the re-activation or replacement of iTunes gift cards.
Distribution of the settlement amount will include payments for: (i) attorneys' fees and costs, (ii) service awards, (iii) settlement administration costs and (iv) plaintiff, opt-in plaintiffs and settlement class members (the net settlement fund, the amount remaining from the fund after deducting (i) - (iii) above).
Distribution of the net settlement fund will be made to claimants who worked at any of defendant's stores in New York City at any time between August 9, 2006 and March 28, 2014 as follows: (i) $5 to any qualified class member who worked for one week or less and (ii) pro rata share to qualified class members who worked more than one week.
Settlement payments to qualified class members will not be considered as a payment of overtime, salary, wages or compensation to any qualified class member under the terms of any company benefit plan or for any purpose except for tax purposes. The receipt of settlement payments will not affect the amount of contribution to or level of benefits under any company benefit plan.
Any amount remaining in the settlement fund six months after the mailing of the settlement checks (deemed to be the date posted on the settlement check) due to any uncashed settlement checks or service awards will be considered unclaimed funds and will be donated to City Harvest.
Claims process specified
No
Yes
FLSA class members needed to opt-in to the settlement. Members of the class who sign, negotiate, endorse, deposit or cash a settlement check in this matter join the collective action under Section 16(b) of the FLSA.
Notice to the settlement class
Notice provided via: (i) e-mail to those class members who are holders of identified gift cards, (ii) internet publication on the established settlement website and (iii) toll-free telephone number.
Notice provided via: (i) notice packets mailed by first-class US mail, (ii) settlement website and (iii) toll-free telephone number and voice interactive response system (IVR).
A PO box and case specific e-mail box were also established for purposes of corresponding with the settlement administrator.
Opt-out procedures
Class members who wished to opt out had to mail to the settlement administrator via US mail (in an envelope with the requisite postmark) postmarked no later than 30 days after the publication of the class notice a written request for exclusion personally signed by the class member. 
The written request for exclusion had to include: (i) the name of the action, (ii) the class member's full name, current address and telephone number, (iii) the class member's signature, (iv) the words "request for exclusion" at the top of the document, (v) the serial number of the card(s) that would be eligible for redemption under the stipulation of settlement or a copy of the qualified verified valid receipt for such card(s) and (vi) a statement that the class member wished to be excluded from the settlement.
Class members who wished to opt out had to mail to the settlement administrator by first-class US mail, postage prepaid and postmarked no later than June 9, 2014 (45 calendar days after initial mailing of the notice) a written and signed request to opt out using the form (opt-out statement) provided with the class notice. 
The settlement administrator was required to stamp the postmark date of the opt-out statement on the original of each opt-out statement that it received and serve copies of each statement on counsel for the parties not later than three business days after receipt. Within five calendar days after the end of the opt-out period, the settlement administrator was to provide counsel for the parties with: (i) stamped copies of any opt-out statements, with social security numbers redacted and (ii) a final list of all opt-out statements. Also within five calendar days after the end of the opt-out period, the settlement administrator (or counsel for the parties) was to file with the court copies of any timely submitted opt-out statements with social security numbers and addresses redacted. The settlement administrator was to retain the stamped originals of all opt-out statements and originals of all envelopes accompanying opt-out statements in its files until such time as the settlement administrator is relieved of its duties and responsibilities under the settlement agreement.
Objections to the class settlement procedures
Class members who wished to object had file with the court and mail to the settlement administrator via US mail (with the requisite postmark on the envelope) no later than 30 days after the publication of the notice a written objection.
The written objection was required to include: (i) the name of the action, (ii) the objector's full name, current address and telephone number, (iii) the word "objection" at the top of the document, (iv) the serial number of the card(s) that would be eligible for redemption under the stipulation of settlement or a copy of the qualified verified valid receipt for such card(s) and (v) a written brief stating in clear and concise terms the legal and factual arguments supporting the objection and any evidence the objector wished to introduce in support of the objections.
A class member could object either on his own or through an attorney hired at the class member's expense.
Any objecting class member who intended to appear at the fairness hearing in person or through personal counsel hired at the class member's expense was required to file with the court a statement of his intention to appear by a specified date. 
The notice of intention to appear had to include: (i) the name of the action, (ii) the objector's full name, address and telephone number, (iii) the words "notice of intention to appear" at the top of the document, (iv) the points the objector wished to speak about at the fairness hearing and (v) the identity (name, address and telephone number) of any lawyer who would speak on the objector's behalf, if any.
Class members who wished to object to the settlement had to mail to the settlement administrator via first-class US mail, postage prepaid and postmarked by June 9, 2014 (45 calendar days after the initial mailing of notice) and received by June 16, 2014 (no later than seven calendar days after the end of the opt-out period) a written objection.
Class members who wished to present objections to the proposed settlement at the fairness hearing, either in person or through counsel hired at their expense, had to state their intention to do so at the time they submitted their written objections. No class member could appear at the fairness hearing unless he had timely filed an objection that complied with the procedures provided in the settlement agreement.
Objections could be withdrawn by the objector at any time.
The settlement administrator had to stamp the postmark date and the date received on the original and send copies of each objection to the parties by facsimile and overnight delivery not later than two business days after receipt. The settlement administrator also had to file the date stamped originals of any and all objections with the court within ten calendar days after the end of the opt-out period.
Objections filed
No
No
Releases
Yes
Yes
Blow-up provision
Yes
Yes
Confidentiality
No
Yes
Links
For links to these summaries, see:
For additional class action settlement agreement summaries, see Practical Law's What's Market Class Action Settlement Agreements Database.
For more resources on class action settlements, see Class Action Toolkit.