Laurent v. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Background

The plaintiffs moved for preliminary approval of a proposed class-action settlement and for approval of the notice to class members. The litigation concerns retirement-plan benefits. The order refers to the court’s earlier class-certification order and its earlier order granting partial summary judgment, but this order addresses the proposed settlement and the procedures for considering final approval.

Class

For settlement purposes, the court certified a non-opt-out class consisting of people who accrued benefits after June 30, 1994, under either of two identified retirement benefit accumulation plans; held a cash-balance account; and received, or whose alternate payees, beneficiaries, or estates received, a lump-sum payment under a plan between March 23, 2000, and August 17, 2006, before the participant reached age 65. Because the class is non-opt-out, class members may not request exclusion from the settlement.

Court’s Ruling

The court preliminarily approved the proposed settlement. It found that the settlement was supported by counsel previously found adequate to represent the class and was reached through arm’s-length negotiations. The court concluded that the settlement was sufficiently fair, reasonable, and adequate to proceed to a fairness hearing. Preliminary approval was not final approval.

The court approved the proposed mailed and publication notices and found that they complied with Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and due-process requirements. The court appointed Continental DataLogix LLC as the notice administrator. Mailed notices were to be sent within 30 days of entry of the order, and a publication notice was to appear in USA Today within 20 days of entry, or as soon as possible afterward. The notice administrator was also required to file an affidavit showing compliance before the fairness hearing.

The court scheduled the fairness hearing for January 27, 2023, at 12:30 p.m. At that hearing, the court would consider final approval of the settlement, named plaintiffs’ service awards, class counsel’s attorneys’ fees and expenses, settlement-administration costs, and timely objections. Class members who wished to object generally had to submit a written objection and related materials at least 30 days before the hearing. Class counsel had to file the fee petition no later than 45 days before the hearing and supporting memoranda for final approval no later than 14 days before the hearing.

The defendants were directed to serve notices required by the Class Action Fairness Act. Pending a final determination about approval, the plaintiffs and class members were enjoined from pursuing other actions concerning the released claims described in the settlement agreement. The stay was lifted, and the clerk was directed to close ECF No. 291.

If the court later grants final approval, the order states that the case will be dismissed with prejudice and class members will be bound by the settlement and related judgments. If the settlement does not become final under its terms, the preliminary-approval order will become null and void and the litigation will proceed as described in the agreement.