After Further Review, The Ruling in the District Court Stands | Practical Law

After Further Review, The Ruling in the District Court Stands | Practical Law

In the National Football League (NFL) concussion case, the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed a district court order certifying the class and approving the class action settlement. The Third Circuit held that the class satisfied the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 23 and the law of the circuit, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding the settlement fair, reasonable, and adequate.

After Further Review, The Ruling in the District Court Stands

Practical Law Legal Update w-001-9005 (Approx. 4 pages)

After Further Review, The Ruling in the District Court Stands

by Practical Law Litigation
Published on 26 Apr 2016 • USA (National/Federal)
In the National Football League (NFL) concussion case, the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed a district court order certifying the class and approving the class action settlement. The Third Circuit held that the class satisfied the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 23 and the law of the circuit, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding the settlement fair, reasonable, and adequate.
Former professional football players sued the National Football League (NFL), claiming that it failed to take reasonable steps to protect them from the risks of head injuries during their time playing in the league. The US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania certified a class action involving over 20,000 former NFL players and approved the settlement reached between the class and the NFL.
Objectors filed 12 separate appeals with the US Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. They argued that the district court abused its discretion in certifying the class and approving the terms of the settlement. After consolidating the appeals, the Third Circuit affirmed the district court's order. It found that the class and settlement agreement satisfied the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 23. (In re: Nat'l Football League Players Concussion Injury Litig., , at *3 (3d Cir. Apr. 18, 2016).)
In affirming the district court's certification of the class action, the Third Circuit held that the class satisfied FRCP's requirements of:
  • Numerosity of class members.
  • Commonality of questions of law and fact between the named plaintiffs and the prospective class.
  • Typicality of the named plaintiff's claims.
  • Adequacy of representation of class counsel and the class representatives.
  • Predominance of common questions over questions affecting only individual class members.
  • Superiority of class resolution to other available methods to decide the controversy.
The Third Circuit also affirmed the district court's order approving the settlement reached between the class and the NFL. The settlement called for:
  • An uncapped monetary fund that would provide compensation for retired players who submitted proof of specific diagnoses.
  • A $75 million program that would provide eligible retired players with free baseline assessment examinations of their objective neurological functioning.
  • A $10 million education fund that would instruct football players about injury prevention.
Agreeing with the district court, the Third Circuit affirmed the district court's order approving the settlement because:
  • The district court properly applied the presumption of fairness when reviewing the class settlement.
  • The district court did not abuse its discretion by finding the class settlement agreement to be fair, reasonable, and adequate after considering the factors specified in the Third Circuit's decisions in Girsh v. Jepson (521 F.2d 153 (3d Cir. 1975)) and In re Prudential Ins. Co. Am. Sales Practice Litig. Agent Actions (148 F.3d 283 (3d Cir. 1998)).
  • Symptoms associated with chronic traumatic encephalopathy (CTE), such as memory loss, executive dysfunction, and difficulty with concentration, were compensated under the terms of the settlement, and therefore, the exclusion of CTE as a qualifying diagnosis for future claimants was not unfair.
In approving the settlement, the Third Circuit also held that the parties' agreement to submit a petition for an award of attorneys' fees at a later date and the parties' clear sailing agreement, which provided that the NFL would not challenge an award of attorneys' fees up to $112.5 million, did not demonstrate that class counsel bargained away any of the class members' claims. Additionally, the Third Circuit held that notice of the attorneys' fees agreement sufficiently informed class members of its terms. Therefore, the parties' agreement regarding fees did not violate due process or indicate collusion between class counsel and the NFL, and could not provide a basis for rejecting the class settlement.
For more information about class certification and class settlements, see Practical Law's Class Action Toolkit: Certification and Class Action Toolkit: Settlement. They have numerous resources to assist attorneys when litigating class actions, including:
For analysis of recent court-approved class action settlement agreements on a variety of claims across jurisdictions, see the What's Market Class Action Settlement Agreements Database.