18th Annual Workplace Class Action Report - 2022 Edition

704 Annual Workplace Class Action Litigation Report: 2022 Edition counsel had ample opportunity to amend the error prior to final settlement approval. On appeal, the Fifth Circuit concluded that the settlement agreement waived a Plaintiff’s right to challenge such award determinations beyond the District Court. The Fifth Circuit concluded that an appeal challenging an incorrect classification fell squarely within the appeal waiver. Id . at *10. Therefore, the Fifth Circuit held that because Plaintiffs opted-in to the settlement agreement as absent class members, they waived their right to appeal, and it thereby dismissed the appeal. In Re Flint Water Cases, Case No. 16-CV-10444 (E.D. Mich. Feb. 8, 2021). Plaintiffs in several class actions brought by individuals, businesses, and putative classes in state and federal court challenged the actions of state and private actors in creating, sustaining, and covering up the Flint Water Crisis. The parties ultimately settled the matter and the Court granted preliminary approval of a $641.25 million settlement between Flint residents and businesses and multiple governmental Defendants, including the State of Michigan, the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, and various individual Defendants Plaintiffs thereafter filed a motion for a preliminary injunction and temporary restraining order (“TRO”): (i) enjoining attorney Loyst Fletcher, Jr. of the law firm Loyst Fletcher Jr., & Associates, (the “Fletcher Firm”) from communicating with putative class members and individual represented Plaintiffs regarding matters relating to the proposed settlement; (ii) requiring Fletcher to provide the Court and Plaintiffs the names of all individuals who received his January 17, 2021 communication; and (iii) requiring Fletcher to inform the Court and Plaintiffs of the names of all individuals who signed the retainer agreement that accompanied the January 17, 2021 letter. The Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. Id . at 2. The Court ordered Fletcher to provide the requested names and information, and enjoined Fletcher and his law firm from making, providing, or disseminating any future communications with or to any and all putative class members, including members of the proposed settlement class or any individuals currently represented by other lawyers in the proposed partial settlement, where such contact or communication contains information that is incorrect, misleading, or improper related to the Flint Water litigation or partial settlement. Id . at 3. In Re Oil Spill By The Oil Rig "Deepwater Horizon" In The Gulf Of Mexico , 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 23580 (5th Cir. Aug. 9, 2021). Following settlement approval of class action claims related to an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, class member Christopher Green failed to opt-out of the settlement, and the District Court denied his request to excuse the failure to opt-out. On Green’s appeal, the Fifth Circuit affirmed the District Court’s ruling. Green was allegedly injured while removing oil from the Gulf of Mexico after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010 and joined the litigation in a class of personal-injury Plaintiffs. The parties entered into the Medical Settlement Agreement ("MSA"), pursuant to which Defendant agreed to provide class members with compensation including payment for injuries and the right to ongoing medical consultation and treatment. Id. at *2. As a result, the class members "fully, finally, and forever . . . resolved, discharged, and settled" all covered personal-injury claims against BP and other Defendants. Id. The MSA had deadline by which class members could opt-out and pursue their claims separately. Green filed a non-compliant opt-out form lacking his personal signature, as instead it was signed by his mother. Thereafter, the District Court ordered Defendant to file a motion for summary judgment to dismiss any Plaintiffs whose claims were barred by the MSA, which included 12 workers and Green who had failed to validly opt-out. Id . at *3. Green argued that Defendant failed to prove that his opt-out form violated the MSA’s wet-ink requirement and that the interests of justice warranted reversal in any event. The District Court rejected this argument. On appeal, the Fifth Circuit found that the MSA expressly allowed for opt-outs following a specific procedure. The Fifth Circuit opined that there was no dispute that Green did not personally sign his opt-out form, and there was nothing in the text of the MSA which indicated that an authorized representative was entitled to sign for him. Id . at *4-5. The Fifth Circuit further determined that Green did not lack notice of the procedure and was not entitled to specific instruction about the non-compliance. The Fifth Circuit therefore affirmed the District Court’s ruling. Shane Group, Inc., et al. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield Of Michigan, 2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 983 (6th Cir. Jan. 14, 2021). Plaintiffs filed a class action alleging that Defendant engaged in an illegal price-fixing scheme. The parties ultimately settled the lawsuit, and the District Court grated settlement approval. An objector, Christopher Andrews, challenged the District Court’s finding that the agreement was "fair, reasonable, and adequate." Id . at *1. On appeal, the, Sixth Circuit affirmed the District Court’s ruling that had granted settlement approval. The Sixth Circuit previously had found that the District Court abused its discretion when it sealed