In re: AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company

Background

The court considered Class Plaintiffs’ uncontested motion for preliminary approval of a proposed settlement with AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company. The settlement would resolve and release claims against AXA and other released parties under the parties’ agreement. The opinion does not state the settlement amount or describe the underlying claims in detail.

Preliminary approval

Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), the court found that it would likely be able to approve the settlement finally and preliminarily approved the agreement, including its releases, as fair, reasonable, and adequate to the classes. The court also found that the agreement was negotiated at arm’s length by experienced counsel with the assistance of a mediator and was sufficiently reasonable to justify notifying class members. The order did not finally approve the settlement; it allowed class members to object and scheduled a later hearing to consider final approval.

The court preliminarily approved the proposed plan for distributing settlement funds and directed that notice be provided to class members. It approved the notice program as the best practicable notice under the circumstances and as satisfying Rule 23 and constitutional due-process requirements. JND Legal Administration LLC was appointed settlement administrator.

Class-member rights and case administration

The court stayed all proceedings in the class action until further order, except as needed to implement the settlement or comply with the agreement. The stay did not apply to related individual actions.

Class members could object by submitting a written objection within 45 calendar days after the notice date. The order stated that class members who did not object on time would waive their objections and would not be heard or have the right to appeal approval of the settlement.

Because the court had revised the definition of the illustration-based classes after the earlier litigation notice was sent, the court approved a special notice giving substituted illustration class members an opportunity to opt out. A request for exclusion had to be mailed and postmarked within 45 calendar days after the notice date. A substituted illustration class member who did not timely request exclusion would be bound by the proceedings, orders, and judgments in the action. The order did not create a second opt-out opportunity for other class members.

Schedule and further proceedings

The order required notice to be sent within 21 days of the preliminary-approval order, set August 28, 2023 as the opt-out and objection deadline, set September 11, 2023 as the deadline for the final-approval motion, and scheduled the final fairness hearing for October 12, 2023, at 2:30 p.m. The hearing was to address final approval of the settlement, whether the classes should remain certified for purposes of judgment, approval of the allocation plan, and Class Counsel’s request for attorney’s fees, expense reimbursements, and service awards.

The order also stated that the settlement and related acts could not be used as admissions or evidence of AXA’s liability or wrongdoing, or that the plaintiffs’ claims lacked merit. If the settlement failed to become effective or was not consummated, the parties would generally return to their prior position as specified in the agreement. The court directed the parties to file an agreement regarding termination of the settlement under seal and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the preliminary-approval motion docket entry identified as ECF No. 699.

Ruling

Judge Jesse M. Furman preliminarily approved the proposed class-action settlement and related notice, administration, opt-out, objection, and hearing procedures. The order left final approval, continued class certification for judgment purposes, the allocation plan, and requested fees and awards for the later fairness hearing.