Pearson v. NBTY, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
772 F.3d 778 · 2014
Citation profile
12 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)
Relies on Boeing Co. v. Van Gemert · Reynolds v. Beneficial National Bank · Redman v. Radioshack Corp. · Eubank v. Pella Corp. · Creative Montessori Learning Centers v. Ashford Gear LLC
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“class action settlements are often quite different from settlements of other types of cases, which indeed are bargained exchanges between the opposing litigants. Class counsel rarely have clients to whom they are responsive. The named plaintiffs in a class action, though supposed to be the representatives of the class, are typically chosen by class counsel; the other class members are not parties and have no control over class counsel. The result is an acute conflict of interest between class counsel, whose pecuniary interest is in their fees, and class members, whose pecuniary interest is in the award to the class. Defendants are interested only in the total costs of the settlement to them, and not in the division of the costs between attorneys’ fees and payment to class members. We thus have remarked the incentive of class counsel, in complicity with the defendant’s counsel, to sell out the class by agreeing with the defendant to recommend that the judges approve a settlement involving a meager recovery for the class but generous compensation for the lawyers — the deal that promotes the self-interest of both class counsel and the defendant and is therefore optimal from the standpoint of their private interests.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Basing the award of attorneys’ fees on this ratio, which shows how the aggregate value of the settlement is being split between class counsel and the class, gives class counsel an incentive to design the claims process in such a way as will maximize the settlement benefits actually received by the class, rather than to connive with the defendant in formulating claims-filing procedures that discourage filing and so' reduce the benefit to the class.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“is the ratio of (1) the fee to (2) the fee plus what the class members received”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.