Coupon settlement

Civil procedure in the United States
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Doctrines of civil procedure Jurisdiction Subject-matter jurisdiction Diversity jurisdiction Personal jurisdiction Removal jurisdiction Venue Change of venue Forum non conveniens Pleadings Service of process Complaint Cause of action Case Information Statement Class action Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 Demurrer Answer Affirmative defense Reply Counterclaim Crossclaim Joinder Indispensable party Impleader Interpleader Intervention Other Motions Pre-trial procedure Discovery Initial Conference Interrogatories Depositions Request for Admissions Request for production Resolution without trial Default judgment Summary judgment Voluntary dismissal Involuntary dismissal Settlement Trial Parties Plaintiff Defendant Pro Se Jury Voir dire Burden of proof Judgment Judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) Renewed JMOL (JNOV) Motion to set aside judgment New trial Remedy Injunction Damages Attorney's fees American rule English rule Declaratory judgment Appeal Mandamus Certiorari
This box: view · talk · edit

In law, a coupon settlement is a resolution between disputing parties about a class action legal case, reached either before or after court action begins. In a coupon settlement, class members receive coupons or other promises for products or services instead of a cash award.^[1] Coupon settlements are recognised in state and federal courts in the United States.

Criticisms of coupon settlements

Coupon settlements have been used as a way for a defendant to forestall major liability by precluding a large number of people from litigating their claims separately, to recover reasonable compensation for the damages. However, existing law requires judicial approval of all coupon settlements, and in most cases class members are given a chance to opt out of class settlement, though class members, despite opt-out notices, may be unaware of their right to opt out because they did not receive the notice, did not read it, or did not understand it.

The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) addresses some of these concerns. Coupon Settlements may be audited by an independent expert before judicial approval in order to ensure that the settlement will be of value to the class members (28 U.S.C.A. 1712(d)). Also, if the action provides for settlement in coupons, the attorney must take a corresponding part of his fee in coupons (28 U.S.C.A. 1712(a)).^[2]

In the United States, federal courts must hold a hearing and make specific findings that the coupon settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequite and that the class members's interests are represented. The following can be taken into consideration during the hearing:

1. The strength of the class member's case.
2. The risk, expense, complexity, and duration of further litigation.
3. The risk of maintaining class action status.
4. The amount offered to each class member in settlement.
5. The form of the settlement (coupons, checks, replacement products, or services).
6. The amount offered in total in settlement.
7. The extent of the discovery that has been completed.
8. The experience of counsel.
9. The presence of a governmental participant.
10. The reaction of class members to the proposed settlement.

Another criticism has been that plaintiffs' lawyers involved in coupon settlements receive cash fees in amounts that generally dwarf the award recovered by individual class members.^[1]

See also

• Settlement

References

1. ^ ^{a b} Steven B. Hantler, Robert E. Northon (Fall 2005). "Coupon Settlements: The Emperor's Clothes of Class Actions". Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics. CBS Interactive. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3975/is_200510/ai_n15640312/. Retrieved December 30, 2010. 
2. ^ "Class Action Fairness Act of 2005". United States Congress. United States Government Printing Office. January 4, 2005. http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BILLS-109s5enr/pdf/BILLS-109s5enr.pdf. Retrieved December 30, 2010. 

External links

• ‘Class ActionFairness Act of 2005