Hyland v. Navient Corporation
- Denise Cote
- 1:18-cv-09031
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Hyland v. Navient Corporation, Judge Cote ordered letters on how Berni affects the class definition and preliminary settlement approval.
The plaintiffs, Navient Corporation, Navient Solutions, LLC, and the conditionally certified class, because the parties were required to address whether the Second Circuit’s decision affected the class definition and preliminary approval order.
What happened
Hyland v. Navient Corporation concerns a proposed class settlement involving the plaintiffs and Navient Corporation and Navient Solutions, LLC. On June 19, 2020, the court preliminarily approved the settlement and conditionally certified a class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2).
On July 8, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held in Berni v. Barilla S.p.A. that a class of past purchasers could not properly be certified under that rule. The opinion directed the parties to address whether that decision affected this case.
Judge Denise Cote ordered the parties to submit letters by July 20, 2020, explaining Berni’s effect on the class definition and the court’s June 19 preliminary approval order. The order did not decide the underlying claims.
The detailed version
- Hyland v. Navient Corporation · No. 1:18-cv-09031
- Denise Cote
- July 14, 2020
Background
On June 19, 2020, the court granted preliminary approval to a class settlement in this action. The court had conditionally certified the class under Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
On July 8, 2020, the Second Circuit held in Berni v. Barilla S.p.A. that a class of past purchasers may not properly be certified under Rule 23(b)(2). The order stated that this decision could affect the proper class definition in Hyland and the court’s preliminary approval order.
Order
The court ordered the parties to submit letters by July 20, 2020, addressing Berni’s impact on the proper class definition and on the June 19 preliminary approval order.
Effect
This was a procedural order requiring further submissions. It did not resolve the parties’ underlying claims, finally approve or reject the settlement, or state a final disposition of the action.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.