About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


Case Citations [1] (April 2023 - August 2023)

handle is hein.ali/aggregate0026 and id is 1 raw text is: THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE Spring 2023 Citations PRINCIPLES OF THE LAW OF AGGREGATE LITIGATION CHAPTER 3. AGGREGATE SETTLEMENTS TOPIC 2. CLASS SETTLEMENTS § 3.04 Notice of Class Settlement S.D.Tex.2021. Subsec. (a) quot. in sup. Leaseholders of oil-and-gas leases, among others, brought a putative class action against oil-and-gas producer, alleging that defendant improperly calculated royalties owed to plaintiffs; after this instant action was initiated, defendant filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The bankruptcy court certified two settlement classes and granted plaintiffs' motion for final approval of settlement. This court affirmed, holding that the notices for class settlements satisfied due process. Citing Principles of Aggregate Litigation § 3.04(a), the court explained that the settlement notices were as clear and concise as possible under the circumstances, their opt-out provisions were not burdensome, and second opt-out requirements imposed on class members who previously opted out were not unduly burdensome. In re Chesapeake Energy Corporation, 567 F.Supp.3d 754, 784. § 3.06 Approval of a Settlement Class S.D.Tex.2021. Com. (a) quot. in sup. Leaseholders of oil-and-gas leases, among others, brought a putative class action against oil-and-gas producer, alleging that defendant improperly calculated royalties owed to plaintiffs; after this instant action was initiated, defendant filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The bankruptcy court certified two settlement classes and granted plaintiffs' motion for final approval of settlement. This court affirmed, holding that plaintiffs satisfied commonality requirements for certifying proposed settlement classes. Quoting Principles of Aggregate Litigation § 3.06, Comment a, the court explained that the proposed settlement classes were satisfactorily cohesive, because they were governed solely by singular sources of law, defendant did not raise affirmative defenses implicating individualized extrinsic proof, and common questions of whether defendant's alleged conduct harmed class members governed plaintiffs' claims. In re Chesapeake Energy Corporation, 567 F.Supp.3d 754, 776. COPYRIGHT C2023 By THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America For earlier citations, see the Appendices, Supplements, or Pocket Parts, if any, that correspond to the subject matter under examination.