When class actions are resolved via settlement, money often remains in the settlement fund even after initial distributions to class members have been made because some class members either cannot be located or decline to file a claim. Courts sometimes dispose of these unclaimed funds by making “cy pres distributions”. The cy pres doctrine takes its name from the French expression, cy pres comme possible, which means "as near as possible." In the class-action context, a cy pres distribution is designed to be a way for a court to put any unclaimed settlement funds to their next best use for the indirect, prospective benefit of the class
[Read More]

The Seventh Circuit Allows “Picking-Off” Class Representatives
By BEVIN ALLEN, ESQ.

For years, defendants have attempted to skirt their liabilities in class action suits by attempting to settle the individual claims of the named plaintiffs and then argue that the named plaintiffs’ claims are moot as they no longer have a personal stake in the case’s outcome. The California Supreme Court long ago determined that this practice, known as “picking off” the class representatives, does not defeat a class action. La Sala v. American Sav. & Loan Ass’n., 5 Cal.3d 864 (1971).
[Read More]

Liability of manufacturers for injuries caused by their products has been shaped in the last few years by a number of US Supreme Court decisions. The decisions in Riegel v. Medtronic, Inc in 2008, Wyeth v. Levine in 2009 and Pliva Inc., et al v. Mensing in 2011 have defined the landscape of medical device and pharmaceutical litigation. The beginning of 2012 has brought yet another decision shaping manufacturer liability with the California Supreme Court’s decision in O’Neil v. Crane Co. on January 12, 2012.
[Read More]