Snitzer v. The Board of Trustees of the American Federation of Musicians and…

Nature of the order

This is a short administrative order concerning filings in a proposed class-action settlement. The court ordered that the attached objections be filed on the electronic docket “for purposes of maintaining an accurate public record.” The order does not state that the court approved or rejected the settlement, ruled on attorney fees, or decided any claim.

Objections and other submissions

The attached materials include objections from class members and Martin Stoner. The objectors asked the court to reject the proposed settlement or change its terms. Their stated concerns included:

- allowing Raymond Hair and Christopher Brockmeyer, among others, to remain trustees; - the proposed neutral independent fiduciary’s limited authority and proposed four- or five-year term; - the trustees’ investment practices and communications with plan participants; - the settlement’s release of claims and the lack of an opt-out right; - the proposed award to plaintiffs’ counsel; and - restrictions or continued secrecy concerning communications and discovery materials.

The materials also include letters from participants supporting approval of the settlement. Those submissions described the proposed settlement as providing substantial payment to the fund and as preferable to continuing the lawsuit. The court did not endorse or reject any of these positions in this order.

Disposition

Judge Valerie Caproni ordered the objections and related materials filed on the electronic docket. No further disposition appears in the opinion text. In particular, the order does not grant or deny approval of the proposed settlement, decide whether the settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate, or resolve the allegations concerning the pension fund, its trustees, or the attorneys.