Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 25, 2023

Sholopa v. Turkish Airlines, Inc.

Judge
Andrew Carter
Docket
1:20-cv-03294
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
17
Class ActionCivil Procedure
In one sentence

In Sholopa v. Turkish Airlines, Inc., Judge Carter approved a class settlement, provided refunds or other compensation, and dismissed the action with prejudice.

Who this affects

The order affects the settlement class—qualifying United States residents who bought tickets for covered Turkish Airlines flights—as well as Turkish Airlines and the named plaintiffs. Non-excluded class members receive the settlement benefits and are bound by the release, dismissal, and injunction; people who timely excluded themselves are not bound by the final order and judgment.

What happened

In Sholopa v. Turkish Airlines, Inc., passengers sued Turkish Airlines and reached a class-action settlement concerning canceled flights scheduled to operate to, from, or within the United States between March 1, 2020, and December 31, 2021. The court had preliminarily approved the settlement, provided notice, and held a fairness hearing.

The settlement class covers United States residents who bought qualifying Turkish Airlines tickets, whose flights were canceled by the airline, and who did not cancel, receive a voucher or rebooking, or obtain a full credit-card chargeback. Nonrefunded claimants may seek a full refund plus 1% of the ticket price. Refunded claimants may choose $10 in cash or a $45 travel voucher, subject to the settlement’s terms.

Judge Carter found the settlement fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the class members’ best interests; finally certified the class for settlement purposes; and directed the parties to carry out the agreement. The court dismissed the action and all individual and class claims on the merits and with prejudice, released covered claims, and permanently barred non-excluded class members from pursuing covered proceedings.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Sholopa v. Turkish Airlines, Inc. · No. 1:20-cv-03294
Judge
Andrew Carter
Date
Aug. 25, 2023

Background

Svetlana Sholopa and Milica Milosevic brought the action individually and on behalf of similarly situated people against Turk Hava Yollari A.O., doing business as Turkish Airlines, and Turkish Airlines, Inc. The parties entered into a class-action settlement agreement. The court preliminarily approved the proposed settlement, authorized notice to potential class members, allowed people to exclude themselves or object, and held a fairness hearing on August 24, 2023.

Settlement Class

The court finally certified the settlement class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and (b)(3), for settlement purposes only. The class consists of United States residents who purchased tickets for travel on a Turkish Airlines flight scheduled to operate to, from, or within the United States between March 1, 2020, and December 31, 2021, when the flight was canceled by Turkish Airlines, provided that the customer did not cancel the flight or fail to show for the first leg before a later leg was canceled, did not request and receive a voucher or rebooking, and did not obtain a full credit-card chargeback.

The class excludes the defendants and specified related persons and entities, the assigned judges and their immediate families, and people who timely excluded themselves. The court found that the named plaintiffs adequately represented the class and appointed Bursor & Fisher, P.A. and Liddle Sheets Coulson P.C. as class counsel. It also found that the notice provided was adequate and complied with the applicable federal rules and due-process requirements.

Settlement Terms

The court approved the settlement as fair, reasonable, and adequate. It found that the agreement resulted from arm’s-length negotiations, that there was no fraud or collusion, that the litigation would be complex and costly, that the parties had developed enough information to evaluate the case and settlement, and that the agreement provided meaningful cash relief within the possible range of class recoveries.

For nonrefunded claimants, the settlement provides the ability to claim a full refund for a canceled flight plus 1% of the ticket price, described as a 101% refund. The order states that $13,011,083.92 remained due to those class members, plus $130,119.84 in interest, for a total of $13,141,194.76. Refunded claimants may submit a claim for either $10 per person in cash or a $45 voucher for future travel. The defendants must pay up to $1 million for refunded claimants. The order states that the settlement makes $14,141,194.76 available in total, with administration by JND Legal Administration.

Release, Injunction, and Dismissal

The settlement binds the parties and all class members who did not timely exclude themselves. It releases covered claims, while expressly preserving claims for personal injuries. The court permanently barred and enjoined non-excluded class members and certain persons acting with them from pursuing covered lawsuits, arbitrations, administrative proceedings, or other proceedings, including organizing a separate class action involving covered claims. The order preserved class members’ rights to contact government agencies and receive benefits obtained by government agencies.

The court retained jurisdiction over settlement administration, enforcement, interpretation, and related disputes. It stated that the settlement and judgment were not admissions of liability or wrongdoing by the defendants. In paragraph 19, the court dismissed the action, including all individual and class claims, on the merits and with prejudice, without fees or costs except as otherwise provided in the order, a separate fee-and-incentive-award order, and the settlement agreement. The order also states that if the settlement’s effective date does not occur, the certification, orders, judgment, and related releases will be vacated and become void.

The authoritative version

Read the full 17-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.