Presson v. Alamo Intermediate II Holdings

Background

James Presson brought this class action against Alamo Intermediate II Holdings, LLC. The proposed class consisted of individuals in the United States who purchased electronic tickets through the defendant’s website for film screenings at the defendant’s New York State cinemas from August 29, 2022, through January 30, 2024, and were charged convenience fees. The parties entered into a class action settlement agreement.

On August 6, 2025, the court preliminarily approved the settlement and conditionally certified the class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3). The court later held a final approval hearing on November 5, 2025. Seven individuals submitted timely and valid requests to be excluded from the settlement class.

Settlement approval

The court found that the notice provided to the settlement class—including direct email notice and a settlement website—complied with Rule 23 and due process. It also found that Alamo properly and timely notified the appropriate government officials under the Class Action Fairness Act and that the notice complied with that statute.

The court finally approved the settlement in all respects. It found the settlement fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the best interests of the settlement class. In reaching that conclusion, the court considered the complexity, expense, and likely duration of the litigation; the class’s reaction; the stage of the case and discovery; the risks of proving liability and damages; the risks of maintaining the class through trial; Alamo’s ability to withstand a larger judgment; and the settlement’s value compared with the possible recovery and litigation risks. The court also found that James Presson and class counsel adequately represented the class and that the settlement resulted from arm’s-length negotiations without collusion.

Judgment and release

The court directed the parties to implement the settlement and incorporated the settlement agreement into the final judgment. It stated that the action was dismissed on the merits and with prejudice. Once the judgment became effective, Presson and all settlement class members who did not opt out were deemed to release the defendant and the specified released parties from claims based on or relating to the alleged collection and retention of fees connected with electronic ticket sales during the covered period. The release included claims that were brought or could have been brought in the action.

The release was given preclusive effect, meaning that covered class members were barred from bringing future lawsuits based on the released claims. The court permanently barred and enjoined settlement class members from filing, pursuing, joining, or participating in such actions.

Fees, incentive award, and administration

The court approved payment of $2,358,333.33 for attorneys’ fees, costs, and expenses under the settlement agreement. It also approved a $5,000 incentive award to James Presson for his efforts and commitment as class representative.

Payments to settlement class members that are not negotiated within 180 days are to be redistributed proportionally among class members who claimed their payments. If a second distribution would be infeasible, unclaimed funds are to revert to the Legal Aid Society as an approved recipient. Except as otherwise provided in the order or settlement agreement, the parties are to bear their own costs and attorneys’ fees.

The court retained jurisdiction until the settlement’s effective date over matters involving administration, completion, enforcement, and interpretation of the settlement. The order also states that approval of the settlement is not an admission of fault, liability, or wrongdoing by Alamo or the released parties.